[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: date formats
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 07:25:56PM -0800, David Lawyer wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 12:31:01PM -0500, David Merrill wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 08, 2000 at 01:21:26AM +0800, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
> > > > <revhistory>
> > > > <revision>
> > > > <revnumber>v2.0</revnumber>
> > > > <date>DD MMM YYYY</date>
> > > > </revision>
> Talking about the revision number not inside a <revhistory>
> What will this be for linuxdoc that has no <revision> tag AFAIK?
> I suppose it could be
> <date>v2.0, YYYY MM DD
> Then it will need to be automatically conveted to docbook which will
> take a little programming work.
> Or we could add a <rev> tag to linuxdoc. Or it might be best to put
> both revision and date after the <date> tag in docbook so as to keep
> it the same as linuxdoc.
We should *not* use DocBook in nonstandard ways unless there is really
no possible way around it and the need is dire!
I can't speak to modifying linuxdoc because I know almost nothing
about it. But does anybody have a sense of how long we will be
maintaining linuxdoc documents? We seem to be getting all new
submissions in DocBook, and gradually the LinuxDoc documents are being
updated, so hopefully in a year or so they will all be updated to
DocBook and our management issues will become so, so much simpler.
Seems that way to me, anyway, but I'd like to know what the rest of
you think. It affects decisions like this. (Why change linuxdoc if
it's going to be gone soon? IF that is the case. If not...)
Dr. David C. Merrill http://www.lupercalia.net
Linux Documentation Project email@example.com
Collection Editor & Coordinator http://www.linuxdoc.org
Finger me for my public key
"... gentlemen do not read each other's mail."
-- Secretary of State Henry Stimson, on closing down
the Black Chamber, the precursor to the National
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com