discuss: Revision History, Revisited (Again)
Subject:
Re: Revision History, Revisited (Again)
From:
Mendel Cooper ####@####.####
Date:
23 Jan 2004 18:29:21 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0401231125470.1245-100000@localhost.localdomain>
On Fri, 23 Jan 2004, Emma Jane Hogbin wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 09:25:09PM -0700, Mendel Cooper wrote:
> > As stated in previous posts of mine, I adopted the <bridgehead> tag for use in
> > burying the revision history in an appendix. Unfortunately, that particular
> > tag has some problems.
>
> Where exactly are you using the <bridgehead> tag? Is this in the original
> DocBook document, or in the final (output) HTML?
I was using the <bridghead> tag in the DocBook source, and in an appendix.
> The revision history is REQUIRED meta data in the DocBook. I'm currently
> working with the OAI <www.openarchives.org> community to have the LDP
> documents included in their repository. The OAI requires DublinCore
> meta-data, which will need to be mapped onto the DocBook/LinuxDoc meta-data.
>
> The revhistory maps onto the "modified" DC element. If it is not stored
> correctly in the DocBook then I/we/OAI will run into major problems
> getting the documents submitted.
Whoa! What this means is that I'll restore a truncated revision history,
with appropriate tags, at the front of the book, and keep the bulk of
it in an appendix. That way everyone should be happy.
Mendel
