Re: Evolution of the DocBook tools

[Jorge Godoy <godoy@conectiva.com.br>]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5394 bytes --]

On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 02:36:06PM +0100, Eric Bischoff wrote:
> Jorge Godoy wrote:
> > 
> > IMHO, if we want not interfere with the stylesheets used and want tro
> > allow a generic use of these tools, there are few alternatives:
> > 
> > - Using the CATALOG directive
> > - Using the DELEGATE directive
> > - Merging CATALOG files (would require that we _change_ the specified
> >   paths!)
> 
> - plus a fourth one, letting db2* scripts determine where are the
> catalogs (my solution)

How to find them? They are named:

- catalog
- CATALOG
- anything.cat
- put your catalog name here... 

> Among the first three ones, only the first one is really good, IMHO.
> 
> The third one was chosen by the current DocBook-tools and implied a
> dirty directory layout if you don't want to re-work the paths. And this
> had bad consequences if you wanted to use alternate stylesheets.

That was what I said... :-) 

> > Which programs don't recognize the CATALOG keyword? Jade and OpenJade
> > work with no problems. Programs that don't work aren't in accordance
> > with the specifications. Should we support them or "brake" them and
> > make the author improve their programs?
> 
> Now I remember Epic does not recognize this keyword.

Hmmm... I didn't know it. 
The question is the same: force them to be compliant with the specs or
make a workaround? Workareounds are dangerous... We'll have to make it
for every program that's not compliant with it... 

> Why don't you put the stylesheets at the same level as the dtd ? it
> allows to change the stylesheets version, without changing the dtd, in a
> simpler way (there are more stylesheet versions than dtd ones).

Wait... What stylesheets are you talking about? I have another
directory that I forgot listing:

/usr/lib/sgml
 - modular-stylesheets

which is Norm's modular stylesheets. 

If this is the stylesheets you are talking about, it's already done. 

> Docbook DTD and stylesheets numbering is a really good idea, indeed. It
> looks like you went even further in the reflexion than I did ;-). What
> about making a symbolic link from the generic name to the numbered name
> ? Like : docbook-dtd -> docbook-dtd-4.0beta.

I don't think it's a good idea and it isn't even needed. The
declaration at the beginning of the document specifies what to use and
the catalogs do the rest of the magic. 

> Iso-entities are not only needed by sgmltools 1.09, but by jade as well.
> Maybe you have them duplicate, just check.

I've checked. Actually, they aren't duplicated. My jade requires a
"sgml-common" package which provides these files. I made a workaround
to the "case" problem using symlinks.

> So I suggest :
> 
> /usr/lib/sgml
>   docbook-dtd-2.4
>   docbook-dtd-2.4.1
>   docbook-dtd-3.1
>   docbook-dtd-3.0
>   docbook-dtd-4.0beta
>   docbook-dtd -> docbook-dtd-3.1
>   docbook-sylesheets-1.49
>   docbook-sylesheets-1.50
>   docbook-sylesheets-1.51
>   docbook-sylesheets-1.52
>   docbook-stylesheets -> docbook-stylesheets-1.52
>   jade
>   iso-entities-8879.1986
>   gnome
>   ldp
>   kde

I don't see why symlinking docbook-dtd to a numbered directory. As I
said, let the catalogs do the magic. 

> > The problem with "iso-entities" is that some stylesheets refer to them
> > on it's catalog. Making a patch in a packaged distribution (RPM, deb,
> > etc.) is easy, but I don't know if it's good in a plain .tar.gz
> > distribution (of course, a note saying that files were modified and
> > the like would be enough).
> 
> I have been adding a catalog for them in iso-entities-8879.1986, the one
> that was in sgml-tools-1.09 ;-) I searched a lot, even on ISO web
> servere, but I was unable to find something that looked "official". So I
> just did like the others and took what was available...

I used symlinks. ;-) Not the best option, thought. I'll have to make a
package with them and then adapt all the other. 

> > BTW, there's another problem regarding iso-entities: sgmltools use
> > them with upper case (ISOamsa) and Norm's stylesheets use it with
> > lower case and an extension (isoamsa.gml). It's another
> > standardization issue.
> 
> I was about to say it. I took :
> 
> ISOamsa  ISOamsc  ISOamso  ISObox   ISOcyr2  ISOgrk1  ISOgrk3  ISOlat1 
> ISOnum  ISOtech
> ISOamsb  ISOamsn  ISOamsr  ISOcyr1  ISOdia   ISOgrk2  ISOgrk4  ISOlat2 
> ISOpub  iso-entities.cat

I changed as little as possible the DTDs. The symlinks in a specific
package might solve the problem... 

> I had to remove the DTD catalog entries to have them shared between
> sgml-tools and the modular stylesheets. Maybe it's not the right
> solution, but it works (and anyway, this catalog had to be patched,
> because it uses the DTDDECL keyword which is not supported by Jade).
> Tell me if you have found a better solution.

A new package. Which DTD are you talking about? I remember patching
one, but now I don't remember which one... :-)

> All of this discussion, according to me, shows that it was necessary to
> embetter the docbook-tools distribution, and to normalize the choices.

I think the same. Isn't it subject for a new list? I can create one to
discuss it. It might be called "sgml-packages" and be hosted here at
Conectiva. Or, if nobody on this list gets bored, we might continue
talking here... 


Regards,
--
Godoy.	<godoy@conectiva.com.br> 

Setor de Publicações
Publishment Division                   Conectiva S.A.