Let me put it this way: My point is that <default> should contain the default, AND NOTHING ELSE. Putting any extra formatting, multiple choices, references, or "see elsewhere" in the field seems like a "type mismatch" (for want of a better phrase).
I think of the xml structure of the module docs much like a database. The xsl transformations should extract data from that database and make it presentable. It seems to me that by placing <br> or "see elsewhere", we are mixing up the content and the presentation. One solution is to have a <seeusage/> tag that could be transformed into "see usage" or whatever. I'm not sure how much better that would be. One thing to think about: If this is done correctly, then the translations could source the syntax/context/status/module entries directly out of the english version. Only description/compatibility/usage would need to be translated. On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Astrid Ke�ler wrote: > Wouldn't 2.2 be a good place to switch? I think error_log/access_log are so much a part of apache that it would be more painful to switch than any gain in consistency. Think of all the hand-written scripts that operate on those names. Anyway, this is a lot of discussion for a relatively minor issue ;-) If you really think I'm wrong, feel free to change it back. Joshua. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
