docbook writers: please no empty para's

[Lauri Watts]

On Thursday 16 February 2006 11:33, Erik K. Pedersen wrote:
> Torsdag den 16. februar 2006 07:28 skrev Lauri Watts:
> > On Wednesday 15 February 2006 22:24, Erik K. Pedersen wrote:
> > > With "to be written" it is ok
> >
> > It's ok from a "makes the docbook compile" point of view.  From a useful
> > documentation for users to read, it's _horrible_
>
> I guess I would agree with that, would it not be a solution not to write
> <para></para> ?

That's not valid either, in fact, that's the reason for most of the empty 
para's showing up: people put placeholder chapters/sections/listitems there, 
and never write the docs to go in them, and these elements require content to 
be valid.

For the example given, you'd have to comment out the entire <listitem> (or if 
it's in a varlistentry, comment that out)

The really best solution is to fill in the para with some actual content, or 
not put empty sections in the doc in the first place.

Regards,
-- 
Lauri Watts
KDE Documentation: http://docs.kde.org
KDE on FreeBSD: http://freebsd.kde.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20060216/1826c8e4/attachment.sig>