[xml/sgml] Debian GNU/Linux reference card

[Geert Stappers]

--aVD9QWMuhilNxW9f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, May 11, 2004 at 12:32:02PM +0200, W. Borgert wrote:
> Quoting Geert Stappers <stappers@stappers.nl>:
> > What should go into CVS?
>=20
> Geert, just to be sure: I _have_ CVS write access in the XML group's
> area and intend to create the module etc. myself.  My question was
> only whether people in the XML group don't like to have the refcard in
> the XML group's repository, as it is not an XML tool or application.

Rereading the original E-mail:
|Hi,
|
|unfortunately, I did not succeed in getting CVS access in
|the DDP (Debian Documenation Project).  In alioth, it seems
|to be somehow "broken", and for cvs.debian.org I did not yet
|get any reply.  Therefore, I like to ask you to accept the
|refcard project - at least temporarily - in the XML groups
|CVS space until I get CVS access in the DDP.
|
|(see http://people.debian.org/~debacle/refcard/)
|
|Cheers,

Having a nice document in a visiable place is good.
Moving a document around is not so good.

Where your first choice is DDP, I second that.
I think it is more wise to put the effort in
getting it in DDP.

Did we make noise at the right place?
Will refcard get in DDP CVS sooner by the discussion here?

>=20
> Files: I will check whether the translation of the documents can be
> handled better by use of poxml and gettext.  If I'm going to use poxml,
> the translated documents would be replaced by .po files.
I have no clue what translators prefer. ( refcard-lang.dbk or lang.po )

>=20
> A README makes sense, of course.
(-:

>=20
> Cheers, WB

Cheers
Geert Stappers

--aVD9QWMuhilNxW9f
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAoLh8OSINbgwa/7sRAmBuAJwIIuxGrjFRVkacrkZQ32ldtlcOtwCfer/P
QtxqD5cwAhZ46pDJKtmxfo0=
=l93k
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--aVD9QWMuhilNxW9f--