Re: DOCBOOK: A straw proposal for help topics in DocBook

[martin dot gautier at myrnham dot co dot uk]

DOH!

Of course it does. Sorry chaps. That'll work fine for me...

Mart

I wrote:
> >>|    So it looks like if we use a Section-like (instead of 
Chapter-like)
> >>|    content model for Topic, it'll mean that Topics can contain only
> >>|    recursive Sections, not numbered ones (Sect1-Sect5), and that
> >>|    Topics can't contain Refentrys at all (or Simplesect).

Norm wrote:
> >>I am strongly opposed to allowing Topics to contain any form of
> >>sectioning element. They are not part of the sectioning hierarchy,
> >>that's one of the main motivations for creating them (IMHO).

Martin wrote:
> There's some logic there but it would certainly be useful to support 
some 
> sort of sort of container(s) within <topic> to allow us to seperate out 
> the topic content.

But the content model Norm proposed for Topic is recursive, just like
the one for Section is -- that is, a Topic can contain other Topics,
nested indefinitely. So you could do:

  <chapter>
  <title>How to Drive</title>
  <topic id="1000" role="topic">
      <title>Start to start your car</title>
      <topic role="discussion">
          <title/>
          <para>you use your keys to switch on the engine to make your car 

          go</para>
      ...

____________________________________________________
Martin Gautier
Technology Consultant
Myrnham Associates
Ph: 0709 2234 228
Fax: 0702 0967 322
email: martin.gautier@myrnham.co.uk
Web: http://www.myrnham.co.uk/




Michael Smith <smith@xml-doc.org>
18/10/01 06:00

 
        To:     docbook@lists.oasis-open.org
        cc: 
        Subject:        Re: DOCBOOK: A straw proposal for help topics in DocBook



I wrote:
> >>|    So it looks like if we use a Section-like (instead of 
Chapter-like)
> >>|    content model for Topic, it'll mean that Topics can contain only
> >>|    recursive Sections, not numbered ones (Sect1-Sect5), and that
> >>|    Topics can't contain Refentrys at all (or Simplesect).

Norm wrote:
> >>I am strongly opposed to allowing Topics to contain any form of
> >>sectioning element. They are not part of the sectioning hierarchy,
> >>that's one of the main motivations for creating them (IMHO).

Martin wrote:
> There's some logic there but it would certainly be useful to support 
some 
> sort of sort of container(s) within <topic> to allow us to seperate out 
> the topic content.

But the content model Norm proposed for Topic is recursive, just like
the one for Section is -- that is, a Topic can contain other Topics,
nested indefinitely. So you could do:

  <chapter>
  <title>How to Drive</title>
  <topic id="1000" role="topic">
      <title>Start to start your car</title>
      <topic role="discussion">
          <title/>
          <para>you use your keys to switch on the engine to make your car 

          go</para>
      ...


 




----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>




----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>