Le 7 juin 2006 à 14:40, Rune Enggaard Lausen a écrit :
> On 6/6/06, Michèle Garoche <> wrote:
>> Yes, I thought of the same solution, but I considered that if the
>> preface was taken out of the preliminary documents, which surprised
>> me a bit, it should exist a good reason for it.
>> I think that there is maybe a confusion between what is "first book
>> content", i.e. what occurs only one time at the very beginning of
>> the book, and what may occur more that one time, for example preface,
>> not necessarily at the beginning of a book, but still is "first book
>> content" in the sense that it is preliminary contents to part of a
>> book.
>
> As I interpret the "first"-part of the name, it is the first "true"
> content of the book. I think we should think more in the lines of
> frontmatter, body and backmatter. In my opinion, a preface is a
> frontmatter-thing.
Yes, for me too. I've personnally never seen seen a preface in the
middle of a book (not to say that it cannot happen though), but it
may appear several times in a set of books, and also several times at
the beginning of the book (say preface to first edition, preface to
second edition, etc..). But still is a front-matter thing.
I wrote that only because when I browse docbook-dtd the only thing I
found that distinguish for example dedication from preface was the
fact that preface is allowed to happen several times, while
dedication only one time.
I've reported a bug yesterday on it, if it is wrong, well it can be
closed.
> This is the reason I think preface should be excluded in
> first.book.content; and even more because it is handled separately
> later in the template.
>
> Does one of the stylesheet maintainers have any comments on this?
> Jirka? Bob? Michael?
>
>> Make perfect sense to me, and English is not my native language as
>> well :-)
>
> Thank you :-)
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rune
>
Amicalement,
Michèle
<http://micmacfr.homeunix.org>
