Re: The two "XML Fixes" patches still in need of review

Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>

From: Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Markus Winand <markus.winand@winand.at>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>
Date: 2019-03-23T23:46:23Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 03/23/19 18:20, Chapman Flack wrote:
>> Perhaps it'd make sense under the XML section in datatype.sgml,
>> but I think I might lean to making it a new section in Appendix D
>> (SQL Conformance).
> 
> Sounds like the option (4) I proposed back in [1]. I suppose it won't
> be much trouble to move.

The current structure of that appendix is: a few introductory paragraphs
(not wrapped in any <sect... ...>), followed by two <sect1>s that are
both autogenerated (the supported and unsupported features tables).

The <sect1>s become independent pages, in the HTML version.

- Move the XML limits/conformance section to a new <sect1> there?

- Before the autogenerated tables, or after them?

The un-<sect>ed intro paragraphs are preceded (in HTML) by a table
of contents, so the new section should show up there.

- Also add a mention (say, in the next-to-last intro paragraph) that
  there are notes on the SQL/XML conformance that have their own
  section (and link to it)? Or just let the generated ToC link be enough?


Regards,
-Chap


Commits

  1. Improve documentation about our XML functionality

  2. Improve documentation about our XML functionality.