Re: [docbook-tc] Are the Schematron assertions normative in 5.0?

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

/ Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz> was heard to say:
| Norman Walsh wrote:
|
|> | Then it makes sense to make Schematron normative, because these constraints are
|> | not expressed in a prose.
|> Oh, I think we must express them in the prose documentation as well.
|
| And by the prose documentation you mean text of OASIS specification or TDG? If
| the TDG, what will be the formal relation between DocBook V5.0 OASIS
| specification and TDG then? I'm just trying to figure out how this will fit into
| OASIS process.

Historically, TDG has been the official reference documentation for
DocBook. I expect that to continue to be the case. (I think this means
we can't get 5.0 to Standard until we finish updating the book.)

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | Whatever else we are intended to
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | do, we are not intended to
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | succeed: failure is the fate
                                   | allotted.--Robert Louis Stevenson

PGP signature