Re: RFC

OK, it seems my words were not clear. So rewording. > > - the problem of entities (global.ent) as used in some old > > translations and the main tree (deletes can make unbuildable > > manuals) > > If you speak from old translations, so translate the other languages > yourself. It is not that I would like to do all the translations. This is a problem (like the translation of function files), that need to be mentioned. This is not a negative grading of translators working on some xml files. It is a fact, that this is a problem. Please _do not_ see this as an attack. There are problems with those entities and so with links to nonexistent XML ids. These are problems that should be discussed. > > - Extending docbook with namespaces. Also with drawbacks (design > > validity testing and other problems mentioned by Jirka). > > I have said that extending DocBook is not allwowed. So reworded: using namespaces to define tags, and use them along DocBook tags. This is exaclty not extending DocBook, but defining a DTD for our custom elements and use those two DTDs (DocBook and PHPDoc) side-by-side. Although I am __not__ speaking of extending DocBook, there is a chapter about "Customizing DocBook", in "DocBook: The definitive Guide". This customizing is what Jirka is talking about. So for DocBook it is allowed. It is our job to decide, whether we choose customizing or another way. I am against customizing DocBook this way, so we are on the same side (and so Hartmut, as I can see in this PDF). Goba