Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 23 Aug 2004 08:53:36 +0000
From:      Murray Stokely <murray@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/security chapter.sgml
Message-ID:  <20040823085336.GC78296@hub.freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20040823084716.GA88989@abigail.blackend.org>
References:  <200408230644.i7N6iVKx061706@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040823084716.GA88989@abigail.blackend.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 10:47:16AM +0200, Marc Fonvieille wrote:
> >   Add a few <application> tags around KerberosIV inside titles.
> >   
> >   Previously, Kerberos5 was printed in bold in the table of contents
> >   while KerberosIV was not.
> >
> 
> I understand the reason of the change: consistency.
> However I wonder if it's a good idea to use application tags in titles.
> For the moment only few applications inside titles are tagged and, of
> course, the TOC is not really consistent on this point.
> Any opinion?

I just added :

 (element (title application) (process-children)) 

to my local stylesheet because I think that the bold application names
look poor in the titles -- this just overrides the freebsd.dsl bold
setting for <application> when it is inside a <title>.

I also think that <command>s look better in italics than the small
monospaced font we used when they show up in titles.

	   - Murray



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040823085336.GC78296>