Locations of texts relevant for firewalling [was Re: Changes to Appendix A/iptables]

Henning Rohde Rohde.Henning at gmx.net
Tue Oct 9 13:48:29 PDT 2001


Hi Gerard,

thank you for helping, but, excuse me, but I think you didn't hit the 
point I'm fiddling with:

Let me illustrate what I want to achive:

I'd like to be able to use 'soft line-wraps' inside a paragraph, for two 
sentences that deal with the same idea, meaning they should be put into 
_one_ paragraph, but that are far too long for comfortable reading.

And I would not like to fiddle around with any limitation of 80 
characters, because that would IMHO make the page look rather ugly in 
windows of a different width or in formats like pdf or similar.


I had to realize that appearently I can't state a definite line-break in 
docbook-xml, except for the technique you mentioned:
	<para><literallayout>{many lines of text,
	where every line is to be _less_ than
	80 characters long}</literallayout></para>

I'd like to use them as:
	<para>{some few sentences}<literrallayout>
	</literallayout>{another few sentences}</para}.

If I use these two tags like I would like to be able to the result 
shows, at least on my system, the disadvantage of not only one 
'linebreak' but one double break for _both_ tags, meaning space of 3 
empty lines between the sentences that are to be seperated!
meaning:
	{some few sentences}<double-linebreak>

	<double-linebreak>

	{another few sentences}
-> This is more than I would have gotten by starting a new paragraph!

Appearently, if <literallayout> isn't put directly after the <para>, the 
tag implies one double-lined linebreakbreak _before_ it.

Could this be avoided anyhow?
Could it be possible that we could the used definitions in a more 
optimal way?

Personally I do not have the time to become an expert of docbook / xml / 
sgml as you are, but, could you do me the please and help me out?


BTW, what is your policy on using tags?

Am I to use any tag that fits into the actual used context, or , the 
delimited choice that is mentioned in conventions.xml?

If we consider <tagA> and <tagB> to cause the same effect, am I to use 
<tagB>, that would be semantically correct in the actual context, or 
<tagA>, that's already mentioned in conventions.xml?

When I asked Mark, he told me to use any tag, but to use as few as 
possible, what the policy you practice?


OK, I hope I've been able to make my intention a bit clearer,
thanks in advance for your help,

	Henning


PS: For Mark: Sorry for being not content with your advice,
I still do not feel comfortable with preferring simplicity for 
semantical correctness.

PPS: Did you know that <emphasis><literallayout>
</literallayout></emphasis> create an empty footnote?


Gerard Beekmans wrote:

> ...
> DocBook has no <br> tag like we have in HTML. In regular <para>'s you can't
> insert a line break, you will have to use the <literallayout> tag which
> listens to your linebreaks. So you'll have to count out the length of a
> line to make sure it wraps after 80 columns (if you tell vim to do that for
> example you'll be just fine, where ever vim wraps at or before 80 columns,
> it'll show up fine rendered in html or other formats).
> ...

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the blfs-dev mailing list