Jan Kundrát wrote:
> Xavier Neys wrote:
> 
>>Some doc dev complained that comparing the dates would not work if two
>>updates occurred in the same day. True. Comparing the versions is a bit
>>more complex and involves two extra scans of the handbooks (the original
>>and the translated one). It's fast enough IMO. My <300Mhz test box still
>>delivers handbook chapters under the second. Note that it is still not
>>100% fool-proof. If a chapter disappears from the original, the mention
>>of a more recent original would not appear on the translations because
>>the xsl scans the original and compares the version with the version of
>>the file that is included at the same position (part/chapter-wise) in
>>the translation. That has not happened yet.
>>
>>I'm not going to parse the version strings to try to quantify the amount
>>of changes that occurred because 1) versions are not structured 2) a
>>single bump could mean a small or a big change, and vice-versa for more
>>bumps. Displaying the date of the original should be a good indication.
> 
> 
> Thanks, I like this idea. Am I correct when I assume that it will check
> both handbook-$ARCH.xml and hb-$foo-$bar.xml when displaying only one
> chapter and all files for current $ARCH when doing ?full=1 ?

Almost.
Full handbook: all files are checked
TOC (part and/or chap = 0), master file is checked
Chapter, hb-$foo-$bar.xml is checked, checking the master files as well would 
be trivial, but why should they be checked?


Cheers,
-- 
/  Xavier Neys
\_ Gentoo Documentation Project
/  French & Internationalisation Lead
\  http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en
/\


-- 
gentoo-doc@g.o mailing list