[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [no subject]
Regards, Yas -----Original Message----- From: Paul Antonov [mailto:apg@syntext.com]=20 Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 10:33 AM To: DITA TC list Subject: RE: [dita] Recommendations for "page break" requests? On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 21:02, Don Day wrote: > I'm not finding great possibilities in my searches either. Unicode=20 > provides a set of characters that are directives for formatters, but I > REALLY don't want writers to learn about that Pandora's box. PIs would > be much easier to detect and handle in processing, particularly since=20 > they provide an opportunity for conditional use, which a codepoint=20 > does not. Oh, I'm not convinced yet, just working up the nerve to=20 > accept the idea. Are you sure you want to use PI's?=20 - they cannot be validated by Schema or DTD (during the authoring process, too) - if you want to tweak processing of some element, what you do? Insert PI before, after, or inside? Processing attribute in such case is much more intuitive, at least with XSLT - using attribute or element is easier from the authoring perspective: you can define element specialization and enumeration for the value of such attribute. So let us at least consider alternative approach: having special attribute and/or element, with no well-defined semantics, which should be ignored by default.=20 Regards, -- Paul =20
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]