RE: [dita] Complexity of bookmap content model

["Paul Prescod" <paul.prescod@xmetal.com>]

Since we have arguments both in favour of the view that appendices "are"
backmatter and "are not", I would like to hear explanations of what
difference it makes. No book that I have on my personal book shelf has a
user-visible section called "back matter". Instead, there are appendices
and then there are booklists like indices. 

Recall that we only added backmatter in order to simplify some content
models. Nobody asked for it on processing or display grounds. Therefore
it will presumably be essentially invisible to stylesheets and other
processors. So I would suggest that the question should not be: "are
appendices backmatter" and should instead be: "in what order do
real-world authors need to put things like booklists, notices and
appendices." My informal poll suggests that appendices nearly always
precede booklists, colophons and other backmatter-ish items. Therefore I
can't see how it matters whether they precede the backmatter element or
precede the other elements WITHIN the backmatter element.

If I am correct, then I would suggest we flip a coin, and put them in
ONE place.

 Paul Prescod