RFC: Upgrading to DocBook 5.0

[Warren Block]

On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, Alberto Mijares wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 3:56 AM, Gabor Kovesdan <gabor at freebsd.org> wrote:
>> Em 24-05-2013 19:35, Gabor Kovesdan escreveu:
>>>
>>> I'm working on upgrading our documentation set to DocBook 5.0 and I'd like
>>> to discuss some details. We have some customizations and strange uses, which
>>> can be expressed with DocBook 5.0's own vocabulary. This upgrade is a good
>>> opportunity to change these, as well. I propose the following changes in our
>>> vocabulary:
>>
>> One more thing to discuss: shall we maintain the sect1, sect2, ... elements
>> or just use section? The section element can have another section element
>> embedded and the numbering in the rendered version is inferred by the level
>> of embedment. This is more uniform and less redundant. In own docs that I
>> write with DocBook I only use section and it works fine. Opinions?

> IMHO, is a good thing to keep a visual clue of the level you are going
> down while writing.

Yes, but that is what the indentation also does.

> So, <sect[123...]> should be kept, I think.

But it is another thing the user has to track.

The DocBook 5 book shows both forms.  Converting to <section> would be 
just a search and replace.  Do we need to pick one method before the 
DockBook 5 version merge?