DocBook RFE #824633

["Bob Stayton" <bobs@sagehill.net>]

This RFE is pointing out that the content model
for firstterm is more restricted than the content
model for glossterm.  Since firstterm is
the first occurance of a glossterm, I don't see why
this distinction exists.

Norm, can you put this on the agenda for our next meeting?

Bob Stayton                                 400 Encinal Street
Publications Architect                      Santa Cruz, CA  95060
Technical Publications                      voice: (831) 427-7796
The SCO Group                               fax:   (831) 429-1887
                                            email: bobs@sco.com


----- Forwarded message from "SourceForge.net"
<noreply@sourceforge.net> -----

To: noreply@sourceforge.net
From: "SourceForge.net" <noreply@sourceforge.net>
Subject: [ docbook-DocBook RFEs-824633 ] classname should be allowed in
firstterm
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 00:49:57 -0700

DocBook RFEs item #824633, was opened at 2003-10-16 07:49
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=384107&aid=824633&group_id=21935

Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Submitted By: Joachim Ziegler (quadruplex)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: classname should be allowed in firstterm

Initial Comment:
I'm just wondering why I cannot nest a <classname>
inside <firstterm>
whereas I can use it inside a <glossterm>. (?)

A firstterm is the first occurrence of a particular
glossterm, so the set of possible children should be
the same.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=384107&aid=824633&group_id=21935


Bob Stayton
Sagehill Enterprises
bobs@sagehill.net