<section> vs <sect1>, ... [was: Re: usb-keys]

[Dave Pawson]

On Mon, 2004-08-16 at 19:39, Karsten Wade wrote:

> I don't attach much importance to them in a short <article> with a few
> <section>s, but it does help with a 200 page book to be able to tell
> from the HTML filename roughly where you are in which file. 

If its sizable then you shouldn't need to rely on filenames?
The structure of presented content should enable that, through
toc's, headers and footers etc. 
  See any standard docbook presented as a series of html files
for examples.


> 
> In the SGML toolchain we use internally, all of the ID tags are used. 
> <sect1> become the main filename, but every <section> has an <a name>
> that is the same as the ID (all in caps), e.g.
> s1-srv-ttr-help.sgml#S3-SRV-TTR-STANDING-STILL .
Even if unused? 

> Without a compelling reasons to have both <sect1...5> and <section> as
> FDP style, can we agree to use the more modular <section>?
Infinitely recursive, not more modular.
  If you need to nest to more than 4 then the document outline needs a
review IMHO.
Give me a reason to change, or persuade Tammy to change the guidelines.




-- 
Regards DaveP.
XSLT&Docbook  FAQ
http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl