From mjohnson at redhat.com Thu Jun 4 22:05:43 2015 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3231576070077358702==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Mark Johnson To: docs at lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re:
vs , ... [was: Re: usb-keys] Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 16:52:51 -0400 Message-ID: <41211EA3.20003@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: 1092681537.3459.7936.camel@erato.phig.org --===============3231576070077358702== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Karsten Wade wrote: >>> >>> [...] Especially if the practice >>>is deprecated? >> >>I'd be very surprised to see it deprecated. Where was the origin of >>this? > = > = > Word of mouth, Mark Johnson mentioned it several times on this list. = > Since he is an active member of the DocBook steering committee, I figure > he has some clue there. I recall a "DocBook Best Practices" tutorial at OSCON (2001??), = presented by members of the DocBook Technical Committee, where the = use of
over was recommended. I also recall some = posts to the docbook (or docbook-apps) list on this same question, = and the general consensus was that
is the preferred element. I also recall asking during a DocBook TC telcon whether , ... = where going to disappear in DocBook V5, and Norm responded = with something to the effect that he honestly didn't know, and that = the decision may eventually lie in the hands of the user community. = (To the best of my recollection.) Having said that, let me remind = you that the policy for changes in major revision numbers in DocBook = is to allow for backwards incompatibilities, but does certainly not = require them. So there is no clear answer. OTOH, just out of curiousity, I downloaded the DocBook source XML = for the latest working draft of the OASIS XML Catalogs Specification = [1], which Norm Walsh edits/authors and noted that (1) he uses =
s, and (2) that his ID attributes are more semantically = derived, than structurally derived (though notice the "s." = prefixes). Some examples:
External Identifier Entries
The <sgmltag class=3D"attribute">prefer</sgmltag> attribute
Using Catalogs
URI Entries
Rewrite Entries I think his example is a nice compromise. If someone's source XML has nested
s that are truly = difficult to unravel, then that author needs to reconsider his/her = document structure. My $0.02, Mark [1] = http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/4952/wd-entity-xml-catalo= gs-1.0_2e.xml > = > = >>I'd be happy to live with either way, but like the option of both. >>Certainly the standard docbook processing favours sect1... as I see it. > = > = > It's possible we could make it optional, but I still don't understand > what the value is in fixed nesting values for
tags. I always > understood it to have been a self-limitation to keep newbies from overly > nesting. = > = > Can you give some examples of where it is useful? > = > = >>It does perhaps beg the question why does fedora-docs start at article, >>when it can go all the way up to set. > = > = > If I understand your statement correctly, I think this has been answered > a number of times. We are doing
sized docs because it's a > bite that we can chew. Look at how well we've done so far, which is not > really that well. If we had massive s to create as part of > s, we'd be finishing the set for FC2 just about the time that > FC5test2 was being released. > = > Have patience, it is through these tiny steps that we will walk our > first mile. > = > - Karsten -- = ---------------------------------------------------------- Mark Johnson Red Hat Documentation Group Tel: 919.754.4151 Fax: 919.754.3708 GPG fp: DBEA FA3C C46A 70B5 F120 568B 89D5 4F61 C07D E242 --===============3231576070077358702==--