<section> vs. <sectN>

[Hiroki Sato]

des at des.no (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) wrote
  in <xzp1xivpabx.fsf at dwp.des.no>:

des> Giorgos Keramidas <keramida at FreeBSD.org> writes:
des> > I'm not sure if it was a matter of personal taste or if he had something
des> > else in mind.  I'd like to hear what he has to say too before deciding
des> > for or against some style rule.
des> 
des> I believe <sectN> is deprecated in newer DocBook versions.  My main
des> reason for preferring <section>, though, is that it makes life a lot
des> easier if you ever need to move sections up or down.

 I do not think it will be deprecated.  nwalsh clearly
 says "The non-recursive forms are imperative" in DocBook RFE ID#438018.

-- 
| Hiroki SATO
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/attachments/20040729/d666910f/attachment.sig>