Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update Transclusion Page on docbook.org #40

Open
tomschr opened this issue Oct 25, 2019 · 5 comments
Open

Update Transclusion Page on docbook.org #40

tomschr opened this issue Oct 25, 2019 · 5 comments
Assignees

Comments

@tomschr
Copy link
Member

tomschr commented Oct 25, 2019

Situation

When opening the Transclusion page on docbook.org, clicking the "Transclusion" link points to https://docbook.org/docs/transclusion/transclusion.html. This page is dated 20 April 2011 and describes the old way of doing transclusions.

However, Jirka updated the text on the thread in 09/2014 on the docbook mailinglist. It showed the more recent way of doing transclusion on top of XInclude 1.1.

Proposed Solution

We shouldn't point nor recommend outdated documents. As such, I'd suggest to copy the HTML page from the docbook mailinglist to docbook.org (unless there is an even better way). 😉

Can be done probably in seconds. 😉

@ndw
Copy link
Contributor

ndw commented Oct 25, 2019

Seems sensible to me. I'm traveling today, but I'll try to resolve this over the weekend. Thanks!

@kosek
Copy link
Contributor

kosek commented Nov 4, 2019

@kosek
Copy link
Contributor

kosek commented Nov 4, 2019

Aha, mystery solved. For some reason these files are in older SVN repo:

https://sourceforge.net/p/docbook/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/docbook/relaxng/docbook/transclusion/

I don't know why files ended up there. @ndw will you republish from this XML source (or perhaps it will be automatic thanks to CI) or should I do it?

@ndw ndw transferred this issue from docbook/docbook Nov 4, 2019
@ndw
Copy link
Contributor

ndw commented Nov 4, 2019

Ok. I've updated docbook.org. The new version doesn't have exactly the same style, but at least it has the right content!

@ndw ndw closed this as completed Nov 4, 2019
@kosek kosek self-assigned this Nov 4, 2019
@kosek
Copy link
Contributor

kosek commented Nov 4, 2019

Thanks Norm. I have assigned myself and reopened so I can fix stylesheet -- different style doesn't matter but it would be good to resurrect metadata section with links to previous version. Not high priority.

@kosek kosek reopened this Nov 4, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants