(Oups, sorry Dave, you'll get this twice, I've clicked on the wrong
'reply' button)
Our preferences balance on the <section>-everywhere side. Use
<section> everywhere, and you won't have to think about it.
I vote to ditch <sect1> to <sect5> elements from the next incarnation
of docbook. <section> is enough.
While we are here, I also vote to ditch some structures that only add
to the confusion, for example:
<section>
<title></title>
</section>
<section>
<info>
<title></title>
</info>
</section>
Why is there a need to have two ways to specify a section's (or
article's, or book's...) title? Considering the fact that DocBook
already has hundreds (literally) of elements, which makes it both
flexible and powerful, but also steeps up the learning curve, I think
the next version of DocBook deserves a thorough cleanup of everything
that can lead to duality (like the sectN vs. section, or info+title vs
title).
section, section, section, just don't overdo it :-)
Good luck.
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 6:18 AM, Dave Pawson <> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 May 2011 07:08:32 +0000
> "Bruce Wen" <> wrote:
>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> Do you have some good experience in using tag sect1 - sect5? Are
>> there any special techniques?
>>
>> Bruce Wen (GuangMing)
>
>
> My preferences, YMMV!
>
> Use either nested sections or sect1..5
> When nesting sect2 in sect1 etc,
> Have
> sect1
> title
> sect2
> title
> sect3
>
> That is simply for appearance sake.
> I think it looks better than
> sect1
> title
> para
> para
> sect2
> title
> etc.
>
> HTH
>
>
>
> --
>
> regards
>
> --
> Dave Pawson
> XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
> http://www.dpawson.co.uk
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:
>
>
--
Fabián Mandelbaum
IS Engineer
