[OpenSER-Docs] module documentation sgml to xml migration

Edson 4lists at gmail.com
Mon Mar 10 19:52:57 CET 2008

Hi, Guys...

Just to put another point of view... removing the template is fine to those
that will write a new module documentation, since, as Henning said, they
usually use another one already wirted as starting point.

But... where to put the documentation templates? The documentation
definitions? The structure definitions... I would say that the template
files (as examples on how to write) can be easily removed, not the
directory... it (for me, sure) seems the right place to put the structure
definitions files...

At last, I would say that SNV revision or date, both have there advantage an
disadvantage... Than, why not keeping both? Something like: "Revision X,
valid on <compilation date> at <compilation time>"?


>-----Original Message-----
>From: openser-docs-bounces at lists.openser.org [mailto:openser-docs-
>bounces at lists.openser.org] On Behalf Of Henning Westerholt
>Sent: segunda-feira, 10 de março de 2008 15:10
>To: openser-docs at lists.openser.org; miconda at gmail.com
>Subject: Re: [OpenSER-Docs] module documentation sgml to xml migration
>On Monday 10 March 2008, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
>> Remaining steps, that should not affect the content:
>> - migration from entities to xinclude (Henning perhaps we can talk a bit
>> on IRC as I get some strange errors, if you have a bit of time)
>Hello Daniel,
>thank you for the migration. Sure, we can talk tomorow about this.
>> - decide about some parts of the documentation if we keep it or not.
>> docbook xml tools are more advanced than sgml ones, more information is
>> displayed now: e.g., svn revision info appears in each document now,
>> should we keep it? It is not really what one will expect from revision
>> part of a document (should show changes done in the document)
>This big revision string is probably a little bit overkill. Perhaps we can
>either: only the svn revision, or the date of the last change? The former
>more advantages for the developer/ writer, the last one is probably better
>understandable for the reader.
>> As now, there are few other sgml documents. The templates for module
>> documentation. Should we keep them (doc/templates/module)? I think they
>> were not in use for quite some time, nor updated. The tls doc will be
>> migrated xml (tls/doc). The rest should be now all over xml.
>Perhaps we can remove the template, i think most people uses a small module
>their starting point now.
>Openser-docs mailing list
>Openser-docs at lists.openser.org

More information about the sr-docs mailing list