discuss: Re: [xml-dev] Templates in Writer


Previous by date: 25 Apr 2002 15:06:20 -0000 Re: [xml-dev] Templates in Writer, Greg Ferguson
Next by date: 25 Apr 2002 15:06:20 -0000 Re: [xml-dev] Templates in Writer, Greg Ferguson
Previous in thread: 25 Apr 2002 15:06:20 -0000 Re: [xml-dev] Templates in Writer, Greg Ferguson
Next in thread: 25 Apr 2002 15:06:20 -0000 Re: [xml-dev] Templates in Writer, Greg Ferguson

Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Templates in Writer
From: David Merrill ####@####.####
Date: 25 Apr 2002 15:06:20 -0000
Message-Id: <20020425155807.GB2577@lupercalia.net>

On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 09:20:50AM -0400, Greg Ferguson wrote:
> On Apr 25, 12:04pm, ####@####.#### wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > Is a <pubdate> a <date> that is in ISO "YYYY-MM-DD" format.
> >
> > Found no explicit statement.
> > But in the exmaple at the end of
> >
> > http://docbook.org/tdg/en/html/article.html
> >
> > a <pubdate> is plain 4-digit year,
> > and <date> is something strange.

I see the difference in <date> vs <pubdate> that the <date> is when it
was modified (<revision><date>, anyway), and <pubdate> is when it was
published. They are *not* the same thing.

In the LDP Database (now Lampadas), I record in pub_date the day *we*
published it, regardless of what the document says. Probably I should
have two pub dates, one what the doc says, one when we published. (And
Ferg, FYI, I use the date of the announcing email as the official date
of publication, even if that should occasionally be not exactly
correct).

> Again, something the LDP recommends. This is actually
> a hold-over from the linuxdoc DTD <date> element, in which
> it was recommended to use "version, date":
> 
>     v1.0, 2000-04-10
> 
> (I need to update the LDP Author Guide on this one.)

Oh goodness. I really disagree with this. There is absolutely no
reason to have the version inside the <pubdate>, since there is
already a separate version field. TDG says:

"The PubDate is the date of publication of a document".

The version does not belong in it IMNSHO.

> > > Are there other date formats?
> >
> > AFAIK DocBook does not cover formatting of dates,
> > times or page numbers. Even the contents of <revnumber>
> > is completely undefined. To me the name seems to mean
> > a integer > 0. But the LDP-Author guide puts a version
> > number there, e.g "1.0".
> > (My contribution to obfuscation is to have fortunes as
> > revision numbers, i.e. digit-free english sentence.)

TDG says :

"DocBook does not require that RevNumbers be sequential or
make any demands on their format. They can be numeric,
alphanumeric, or whatever suits your needs."

The example in the Article page shows "1.0" and the like.

-- 
David C. Merrill                         http://www.lupercalia.net
Linux Documentation Project                   ####@####.####
Lead Developer                                 http://www.tldp.org

My father was a relentlessly self improving bloungerie owner from Belgium
with low grade narcolepsy and a penchant for buggery. My mother was a 15
year old French prostitute named Chloe with webbed feet.
		-- Dr. Evil, Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me

Previous by date: 25 Apr 2002 15:06:20 -0000 Re: [xml-dev] Templates in Writer, Greg Ferguson
Next by date: 25 Apr 2002 15:06:20 -0000 Re: [xml-dev] Templates in Writer, Greg Ferguson
Previous in thread: 25 Apr 2002 15:06:20 -0000 Re: [xml-dev] Templates in Writer, Greg Ferguson
Next in thread: 25 Apr 2002 15:06:20 -0000 Re: [xml-dev] Templates in Writer, Greg Ferguson


  ©The Linux Documentation Project, 2014. Listserver maintained by dr Serge Victor on ibiblio.org servers. See current spam statz.