[kde-doc-english] checkXML vs meinproc4

[Luigi Toscano]

On 08 settembre 2014 04:28:36 CEST, "T.C. Hollingsworth" <tchollingsworth at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Jack <ostroffjh at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> > Thanks for pointing out where the lines actually come from. 
> However, I
> > think we now have several separate issues.
> >
> > 1) I would consider that type of outlined area an improvement over
> <hr> for
> > a true <screenshot> where it does make sense to set it the image off
> from
> > the text.  I would probably even leave that for most of the images
> in the
> > kmymoney manual.  Whether it is switched for all of kde or made an
> option -
> > could the choice end up being an attribute of the <screenshot> tag?
> >
> > 2) However, for many images, I consider that they fit within the
> flow of the
> > text, thus my attempt to use some type of inline tag - avoiding any
> boxes,
> > lines, or other set-offs.  However, I do understand it should be
> done in a
> > way that does not burden the translation process and teams.  Thus my
> > previous question about isolating the image tags in their own para
> with no
> > other text components.
> 
> What we could do is style <screenshot> and not style plain ol'
> <mediaobject>.  This way, you'd use
> <screenshot>...<mediaobject>...</mediaobject></screenshot> for the
> grey box and just <mediaobject>...</mediaobject> for no style.
> 
> In fact, semantically I think this makes a lot of sense.  It seems
> rather intuitive to use <informalfigure>, <screenshot>, et. al. when
> you want some styling around your image, and just to use a plain
> unwrapped <mediaobject> when you do not.  So I'd totally support this
> (and patch kdoctools accordingly) if others agree.

Thanks (and welcome back), it makes sense; could you please send a review against kdelibs (KDE/4.14, last branch)? We can then forward-port to kdoctools/kf5.


-- 
Luigi