On ons, 2012-04-04 at 16:29 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Unfortunately, we can't just replace the sect1's in in Appendix F [0]
> > with refentry's, because the content model of DocBook doesn't allow
> > that. (You can't have a mixed sequence of sect1 and refentry, only one
> > or the other.)
>
> Hm, would it work to have something like
> <sect1> &pgbench; </sect1> <refentry> &pgbench; </refentry>
> so that we get both? Probably with some conditional to avoid duplicate
> output in html/pdf.
I don't think I follow what you are trying to do there.
> (Why isn't this a problem for the SPI pages or dblink?)
The don't mix sects and refentries at the same level.
> > I think it would be useful to split this up into three sections:
> >
> > F.1. Extensions
> > F.2. Client Applications
> > F.3. Server Applications
> >
> > where the first looks like now and the other two contain the refentry
> > pages.
>
> +1, but is there something that would not fit in either category? Not
> sure if we have a SGML page for init-scripts for instance.
No, everything we have documented fits in those categories.
> If you're going to monkey around in this general, please also look at
> the README. It should probably just go away.
Indeed.
