This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the DocBook project.
Re: [docbook] Ruminations on the future of DocBook
I am by no means knowledgeable about XML or how it is actually processed
but I see the current number of elements as a distraction to many users who
just want to write a document and then have it transformed so it appears
as desired. As I see it, minimizing the quantity of tags would be a good
thing. The structure of the DocBook at a high level does this, for example:
<!ENTITY % admon.class
Already groups all admonitions into a class. Then each element that is part
of this grouping is further defined as tip is below:
<!ENTITY % tip.element "INCLUDE">
<!ELEMENT tip %ho; (title?, (%admon.mix;)+)
<!--end of tip.element-->]]>
<!ENTITY % tip.attlist "INCLUDE">
<!--end of tip.attlist-->]]>
So I guess my question is why not just produce an <admonition> element
that specifies a particular set of roles that are to be used (for example:
graphics.attrib provides for align=left,right, or center) like admonition.attrib
where role=note, caution, warning, important, tip, hint, etc.? This would
help minimize the actual structure of the DTD or schema but require a writer
to set the role as required. Maybe there is a programmitcal reason that this
cannot be done.
As I stated, this seems moot because there are many documents that already
rely on each individual element and a change like this would require a lot
of work to retag to meet the new DTD/schema.
There are reasons that elements were added to the DTD in the first place.
I don't really see a reason for a <figure> and <simplefigure>
because as I see it the structure could have allowed for zero or one title.
But, because I couldn't write a DTD to save my life, I probably should close
Pierre Machard wrote:
Le jeudi 29 mai 2003 à 18:34 -0500, Jeff Biss a écrit :
For example why have <note>,
<important>, <caution>, <warning>, <tip>? Maybe a single tag could have
been used with the differences being made with role:
<attention role=caution> <para>Don't touch that!</para></attention>.
The same could have been done with sections: <section>This is just a
<section role=numbered>This section gets a number.</section>
I know that this is water under the bridge (especially considering the
need to support existing documents), and my not simplify things, but
with my limited experience with DTDs it seems that it may provide some
way of simplifying the structure while allowing the complexity to be
handled through the use of attributes.
I would like to add a few words about your suggestion. As far as I know,
a lot of attributes like role=blabla are not always displayed or
I kown that this problem depends of the stylesheet, but I believe that a
lot of docbook's users are not friendly with DSSSL/XSL stylesheets, or
do not want to learn how to modify stylesheets.
The syntax itself (the DTD) is very comprehensive, the most difficult
aspect, is the rendering. Don't you agree with that ?