[postgis-devel] Do you think we should put a note about 2D and3D on each function?

[Mark Cave-Ayland]

Obe, Regina wrote:
> Is there an easy way to define a new tag or something for this.  I was
> thinking if we had a separate tag for it, it would be easier to pull out
> those functions that have that tag later.
> 
> I guess we have similar issues with MM.  Anyrate we can still do it if
> we stick to the same terminology, but I figured it would be less prone
> to error if we had a tag.
> 
> I am feeling a bit more confident about my XSLT abilities now that I
> have a couple of unrelated projects that involved me having to write xsl
> files to transform the data into another format.  I was hoping to tackle
> generating the function alter comments statements in the next week or so
> trying to stick with just using a custom .xsl file for minimum increase
> in dependencies.
> 
> Which brings me to the topic of if we create a custom xsl file for this,
> where should we put this in the source tree or is this direction
> completely wrong?
> 
> Thanks,
> Regina

I'd say post a proof-of-concept to the list. As long as the paths within 
the docbook source are all relative, I see no reason why we can't 
include an extra .xsl file if required.


ATB,

Mark.

-- 
Mark Cave-Ayland
Sirius Corporation - The Open Source Experts
http://www.siriusit.co.uk
T: +44 870 608 0063