Re: [docbook-apps] Converting HTML to DocBook

[Christian Hattemer <c.hattemer@arcor.de>]

Bob Stayton wrote:

> It's not so much for conversion of HTML tables into DocBook, because the
> content models of entry and td differ completely.  So you can't cut and
> paste an HTML table into DocBook.  Rather, it was to make it easier for
> those people who are already familiar with HTML table coding to write
> tables in DocBook.

But isn't that a step against DocBook's principle to have long
selfdescriptive element names?

> Well, that statement is there because the CALS specification as put forth
> in OASIS Technical Memorandum TM9502:1995 says:
> 
> "The content model for an <entrytbl> is the same as that of a <tgroup>
> except that <tfoot> is omitted and <entrytbl> is self-excluding."
> 
> There is no way to express this part of the standard in DTD syntax.  It is
> possible that more rich schema syntaxes can express this intent.  So using
> multiply nested tables may mean your documents won't validate under some
> future schema.  That's a pretty vague warning, though.  More important for
> your purposes is whether the stylesheets work with them?  I think so, but
> I've not tested them.

I've tested it before sending my previous mail. It works for HTML and FO.
In HTML the nested tables have no frame while they have in FO. But this is
only a minor issue.

Bye, Chris