Uttered "Paul W. Frields" <stickster@xxxxxxxxx>, spake thus: > Both <book> and <article> in DocBook support a CDATA attribute called > "status". (I.e., <book status="published"> or something like that.) > Does this mean we could have XSLT do the work of deciding which > stylesheet to use, without having to have a new "make" target? Maybe I know this, but I can't remember it at the moment. I need a little more thinking on this. My question is: When is an FDP document "published"? It seems to me that being considered as a published document is solely determinable from the context in which the document appears. I'm not considering "publication" as it relates to copyright, just making the distinction between DRAFT and PRODUCTION versions of a doc. For example, you write a manuscript and send it to a publisher. They love the first draft and fire up the presses. Now, the copy you sent them is clearly DRAFT and their bound version is clearly PRODUCTION, even though the words in each are exactly the same: it's the context or pedigree that matters. Documents built locally from CVS can never be "production" because they are not official copies. To emphasis this, we now have a watermark indicating its draft status. Documents obtained from DocsRawHide can never be "production" and need to be watermarked as draft. Official, production-quality documents are located (where?) and produced by (whom?). Only those copies need have the draft watermarking revoked. Docs included in the distribution are "production". Where else do the official docs reside? Who places them there? How do they know when to do this? I don't think the document itself should know whether it is released or not. It is too easy to leave the blessing in the document as modifications are in progress. An external mechanism makes sense to me. We really need only one CSS stylesheet in the docs CVS: the fedora-draft.css file, and we have that. Any official-looking document renderings should come from whom ever is constructing the official-looking release, but anything in our CVS is strictly for draft documents. Does this mean that document authors can't generate official document renderings? Yes, if by that you mean "Fedora Documentation Project" official copies. Anyone wanting to produce their own published renderings are free to take the "fedora-draft.css" stylesheet and edit as desired. I would agree to change the XSLT and Makefile.common stuff to reference "fedora.css" and to make "fedora.css" a symlink to the "fedora-draft.css" file. That would make switching the CSS stylesheet easier because a change would not corrupt the local CVS image. Comments? Suggestions? Donations?
Attachment:
pgpJVC5dnIcNz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
