This is the mail archive of the
docbook@lists.oasis-open.org
mailing list for the DocBook project.
Re: DocBook filename extension
- From: "Matt G." <matt_g_ at hotmail dot com>
- To: docbook at lists dot oasis-open dot org
- Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 05:48:07 +0000
- Subject: DOCBOOK: Re: DocBook filename extension
- Bcc:
>What is the official DocBook filename extension (assuming there is
>one)? I've seen .docb, .dbx, and .xml.
>
>Just curious.
>
>-Brian
I use '*.xdbk'. I don't understand why people use '*.xml', since it's not
just XML - you can be far more specific than that. I regard that as
somewhat like naming files containing C code as '*.txt', since they are
technically text files (well yeah... but OF COURSE they're text files!).
Maybe one reason I'm so keen to distinguish XML DocBook from other types of
XML files is that I have pattern rules, in my makefiles, for processing
them, as well as files of other XML-based formats.
Perhaps a standardized DocBook filename extension isn't so important, since
people don't often use it as a distribution format, though.
What I'd like to know is what people use for external parsed entity filename
conventions. I use '*.xdbk.ent', since they are external parsed entities
that tend to be fairly specific to XML DocBook.
For external parameter entities, I generally use '*_xdbk.dtd', since a DTD
fragment is theoretically usable as a stand-alone DTD (unlike external
parsed entities, which don't have to meet criteria as stringent as
well-formed XML files), and are more reusable from DTDs for another
vocabulary, but tend to specific to XML DocBook, in some way. I regard
external parameter entities in much the same way as I view C header files -
the extension declares the format and usage model, but not the usage
semantics.
Anyway, I'd be glad to hear others' thoughts on the topic.
Matt Gruenke
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.