docbook writers: please no empty para's

[Nicolas Goutte]

On Thursday 16 February 2006 14:06, Lauri Watts wrote:
> 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.

There is also alway the solutionof a comment (like done in source code)

<!-- ### TODO: to be written -->

>
> Regards,

Have a nice day!