This is the mail archive of the
docbook@lists.oasis-open.org
mailing list for the DocBook project.
Re: Re: RFE 472229: Allow HTML Tables in DocBook
On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 03:34:36PM -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
> / Eduardo Gutentag <eduardo.gutentag@sun.com> was heard to say:
> | Option 2 makes much more sense to me.
>
> Why?
>
> My thoughts are:
>
> 1. We're moving towards more modular, reusable documentation. Sooner or later,
> probably sooner, someone's going to want to include a fragment that uses one
> table model along with a fragment that uses the other. And that won't be
> possible.
>
> 2. This is exactly the problem namespaces are supposed to solve, isn't it? :-)
>
> 3. Won't tool vendors have to support mixed namespaces "real soon now"
> anyway, for things like XLink, SVG, MathML, etc. So tools will
> actually be able to handle this?
Namespaces sound great, but perhaps some more details about
how namespaces would be used in DocBook would help. Then
we could better understand what impacts they would have on
current tools and files.
bobs
Bob Stayton 400 Encinal Street
Publications Architect Santa Cruz, CA 95060
Technical Publications voice: (831) 427-7796
Caldera International, Inc. fax: (831) 429-1887
email: bobs@caldera.com