This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the DocBook project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [docbook] Ruminations on the future of DocBook

Tobias Reif wrote:

I mean that no feature of DocBook should rely on any feature from any specific schema lang, and that no single specific schema lang should be normatively referenced in any DocBook spec.

Relax NG is only tool which can be used to formally and precisely describe syntax of DocBookNG.

Of course you can describe document type and all its content models in prose, in human readable text. But this will be very verbose and very hard to use description.

As Relax NG doesn't have features like attribute defaulting its usage has no sideeffects and you don't need process RelaxNG grammar in order to process DocBook (however this is not true for DTD). But there definitively should be formal description of DocBookNG grammar, this formal description should be normative and Relax NG is the most suitable tool for this task at these days.


P.S. I notices that I'm using DocBookNG instead Norm's DocBook label. But I mean the same.

  Jirka Kosek  	

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]