This is the mail archive of the
docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org
mailing list .
Re: Re: mixing section elements
- From: Roel Vanhout <roel at riks dot nl>
- To: Jeff Beal <jeff dot beal at ansys dot com>
- Cc: 'Norman Walsh' <ndw at nwalsh dot com>, docbook-apps at lists dot oasis-open dot org
- Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 17:38:04 +0100
- Subject: Re: DOCBOOK-APPS: Re: mixing section elements
- References: <E08C8F26F6901D42B1201763D125853815B496@ntdevexc.win.ansys.com>
The chunking you describe is exactly what I've been trying to achieve
the past week(s), at first I had the first order you describe but I was
advised to do it like in your second example; the reasoning was like you
say. Anyway, it would be useful (for me at least :) ) if this change was
made; do I need to put in an RFE for this?
cheers,
roel
Jeff Beal wrote:
I would think that
| <chapter>
| <title>Example title</title>
| <sect1><para>Test para</para></sect1>
| <simplesect><para>Another test para</para></simplesect>
| </chapter>
would really mess up the chunking. Where would the simplesect be chunked if
you were chunking the <sect1/>? Thinking in terms of chunking only,
| <chapter>
| <title>Example title</title>
| <simplesect><para>Another test para</para></simplesect>
| <sect1><para>Test para</para></sect1>
| </chapter>
would provide better results. This way, authors can have a few
"simplesect"s worth of data included with the chapter, and the actual
"section"s are chunked out according to the standard chunking parameters.
Just my two bits worth.
Jeff Beal
-----Original Message-----
From: Norman Walsh [mailto:ndw@nwalsh.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 9:01 AM
To: Roel Vanhout
Cc: docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: DOCBOOK-APPS: Re: mixing section elements
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
/ Roel Vanhout <roel@riks.nl> was heard to say:
| the moment) Arbortext's Epic editor to edit the document, and it
| complained that <simplesect> was out of context when it's parent node
| also had <sect1> or <section> elements, eg like this:
You can't mix section types. They form a strict hierarchy.
| <chapter>
| <title>Example title</title>
| <sect1><para>Test para</para></sect1>
| <simplesect><para>Another test para</para></simplesect>
| </chapter>
It might be reasonable to allow that, although I would always want to
prohibit
<chapter>
<title>Example title</title>
<sect1><para>Test para</para></sect1>
<section><para>Test para</para></section>
</chapter>
and
<chapter>
<title>Example title</title>
<sect1><para>Test para</para></sect1>
<simplesect><para>Another test para</para></simplesect>
<sect1><para>Test para</para></sect1>
</chapter>
| I also couldn't add a <simplesect> element as a sibling to a <sect1>,
| <sect2> or <section> element through Epic's GUI.
| I looked through the documentation (tdg) and looked at the content
| model of chapter, and although I'm not an expert at reading dtd's, it
| looks like my example should be valid. Now, the dtd that Epic uses is
| that for DocBook 4.0; has this changed in the mean time? Did I read
| the content model wrong? Any hints? Thanks!
You can do this:
<chapter>
<title>Example title</title>
<sect1><para>Test para</para>
<simplesect><para>Another test para</para></simplesect>
</sect1>
</chapter>
Be seeing you,
norm
- --
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | One of the great misfortunes of
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | mankind is that even his good
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | qualities are sometimes useless to
| him, and that the art of employing
| and well directing them is often
| the latest fruit of his
| experience.--Chamfort
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>
iD8DBQE+L/WYOyltUcwYWjsRApKNAJ0Raz/BpT1US2D3Sku9iPAYUwqFDgCfauT1
c5dHE0pV1kq3PKceidA/nPY=
=qcTJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----