Re: DocBook repository confusion

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> writes:
> On another front, the publishers 1.1 schema appears to have been
> checked into the 5.1 branch, but not master. So the version in the 5.2
> branch is 1.0 not 1.1. Iâm in the process of bringing the publishers
> version in the 5.2-dev branch up to 1.1+.

Sorry. I was confused. Apparently it *was* in master, but not in 5.1.

> I propose also that we publish a 1.2b of Publishers thatâs based off
> of 5.2 DocBook schema. Mostly this involves marking new elements as
> ânot allowedâ (buildtarget, legalsection, etc.)

Apparently admonitions were forbidden from publishers 1.0 but allowed
in 1.1, so Iâm leaveing danger in 1.2.

> Does the TC have a sense of whether or not âformalgroupâ should be in
> Publishers?

Iâm leaving this in as well, for the moment.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Hanging is too good for a man who makes
http://nwalsh.com/            | puns; he should be drawn and
                              | quoted.--Fred Allen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature