[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference vaxuum::document_ft

Title:DOCUMENT T1.0
Notice:**New notesfile (DOCUMENT.NOTE) now available (see note 897)**
Moderator:CLOSET::ADLER
Created:Mon Feb 09 1987
Last Modified:Thu Oct 31 1991
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:897
Total number of notes:4397

655.0. "Why no default file type with <INCLUDE>?" by CASEE::CLARK (Ward Clark) Tue Jul 14 1987 13:11

    The DCL-level DOCUMENT command assumes a default file type of .SDML
    (and .GNC in BL8).

    I was surprised to discover (via failing batch job) that the <INCLUDE>
    tag processing has no default file type.

    -- Ward
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
655.1don't default any filetypesVAXUUM::KOHLBRENNERTue Jul 14 1987 14:2029
    None of the SDML tags that take a filespec default the filetype
    portion.  Defaulting the filetype is probably a good idea, but
    our hope was to get users to supply a logical name rather than
    a full file spec.  
    
    (We could still default the filetype, of course, so this is not 
    a counter-argument, merely an indication of our intent.)
    
    The tags in question are <element>, <include>, <figure_file>,
    <example_file>, <table_file>.  Are there others???
    
    Historically, the development of DOCUMENT was focused on producing
    big books from lots of little pieces.  There was a need to get the
    details of full filespecs out of the GNC file so that the names
    of files and their locations could easily be changed without altering
    the source file.
    
    When you are building a big book, you can put <includes_file>
    tags in the book's profile to indicate the associations between
    logical names that are referenced in each chapter with the actual
    file specs that are used.  THus all the filespecs can be expressed
    in one file, the profile.  You can also put them all in a COM file.
    
    When you have all the filespecs in a single file (either the COM
    file or the profile) the need to default the filetype seems of low
    priority.
    
    bill
    
655.2Let's not teach novices bad habitsCASEE::CLARKWard ClarkTue Jul 14 1987 15:1116
    It seems to me that if your intent is to encourage the use of logical
    names, the current practice of supplying no default file type is
    counter productive.

    It's probably the case the the novice DOCUMENT user won't go to the
    trouble of using logical names and/or <INCLUDES_FILE> for a while.
    Instead, they'll do the simplest thing first -- use actual file name
    with REQUIRED FILE TYPES.  For example,

	<FIGURE_FILE>(LN03\snazzy_picture.sdml\50)

    If "snazzy_picture.sdml" were initially allowed to be simply
    "snazzy_picture", a logical name could be easily defined at some later
    date, with no change needed to the DOCUMENT source file.

    -- Ward
655.3what's the point of this?VAXUUM::KOHLBRENNERTue Jul 14 1987 15:589
    You win the argument, Ward.
    
    We made a big booboo.
    
    Consider this an abject apology.
    
    Is there anything else that you need?
    
    bill