jade vs db2html

jade vs db2html

[madhu]

hi,
i have been using — which used to get parsed as #8212 while using db2html
script but now that i have rediscovered jade :-) and am very happy with its
output while using norman walsh's latest db152.zip stlye sheets ,unfortunately
jade doesn't parse this — as #8212 or as  -  ( minus sign) .
now i have used this — liberally :-( in one of my documents how do i
rectify this .this usage is becuase of me reading probably some linuxdoc howto
long back ,incase this is not requirement of DocBook or jade can i stop using
this — instead of - ( minus sign)  since it will also solve another
problem which is related to KFM the defualt KDE file manager/browser which
doesn't render #8212 as minus ( - ) .netscape renders it properly.
can some body help me with a perl or shell script to sort out this mess of mine 

thanking you 
regards

-- 
maddy
***********----------------************---------------------**************-----------******** 
"Any path is only a path,Does this path have a heart?If it does,The path is
good;if it doesn't it is of no use" 		Carlos Castaneda,The teachings
of Don Juan
***********----------------************---------------------**************-------------*******

Re: jade vs db2html

[Mark Galassi]

Dear Maddy,

I don't quite understand what you mean about using "jade instead of
db2html".  db2html just invokes jade.

It looks like you upgraded the stylesheets.  Do you suggest that we
update the RPMs to use the new ones?  Is there enough new stuff?

I'll see if Norm answers you on the use of — before I dig into
it: he might know off the bat what the current stylesheets do.

Re: jade vs db2html

[madhu]

hi
thank you for the quick response.
On Fri, 04 Feb 2000Mark Gallasi wrote:
> Dear Maddy,
> 
> I don't quite understand what you mean about using "jade instead of
> db2html".  db2html just invokes jade.
does it? in a way yes and no .i guess the problem lies with the word "just"
;-).the outputs from both  are not same .
> It looks like you upgraded the stylesheets
whew! , yes and i also tried doing this .i changed the path in cygnus-both
dsl.and made it point to the new db152 html/print in james clark's part.but
still the outputs are different.i have a feeling that your part of cygnus-both
dsl is tuned to make the ouput look linuxdocish probably to maintain some
uniformity and continuity  i guess.
 >.  Do you suggest that we update the RPMs to use the new ones?  Is
>there enough new stuff?  
i am not sure that alone will help but a small tutorial on what db2html and
other scripts are doing will help the unitiated like me for example =) .there
are a lot people who use db2html but end up asking jade questions.
frankly a rewrite of db2html or howto on rewrite might be of more help
,catching up with norman everytime might be a tough act and maybe unneccessary
all the time .it will surely help unhackers like me =).
 >if norm answers you on the use of — before I dig into
  > it: he might know off the bat what the current stylesheets do. -- 
 i have solved that problem by doing this <!ENTITY mdash  "-"  > correct me on this if i am wrong
.but if i use db2html even after making it point to new style sheets it renders
 &mdash; as #8212  ;-without making the above correction ;-) aah!  i am  
stumped =(. but i am more happy with pure jade output so i want know is it okay
if use just this -(the minus sign) instead of typing &mdash .it will make my
job easier .incidentally docbook the definitive guide is clueless on this .

thank u in advance 
regards

maddy
***********----------------************---------------------**************-----------******** "
Any path is only a path,Does this path have a heart?If it does,The path is
good;if it doesn't it is of no use" 		Carlos Castaneda,The teachings
of Don Juan
***********----------------************---------------------**************-------------*******