Re: [docbook-tc] Version reference for DocBook Publishers documents?

[Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>]

On 8 February 2011 13:15, Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz> wrote:
> Dave Pawson wrote:
>
>> I've always expected the version to be numeric Scott?
>
> That was never case with DocBook 5. See
>
> http://www.docbook.org/docs/howto/#cust-naming
>
> http://www.docbook.org/tdg5/en/html/ch05.html#s-notdocbook
>
>> For which TDG is clear. "Don't call it docbook"
>> Bit late now, but renaming the document element
>> to x-pubs, where x is book/article/... perhaps?
>
> Why to rename root element, it doesn't make sense.

My reasoning is that the user is going to be caught out?
I'd like the processing (validation or styling)
to point out 'this is not docbook', somehow.


>
>> Or simpler, just give it a clear / different name,
>> then use docbook ns etc?
>
> I think it is enough to call it DocBook Publishers or something like
> that and add version="5.0-variant publishers-1.0" to root element.
>
> (variant is better then extension, because some elements were removed)


Which is fine for a user that understands that difference.
How many do?

IMHO it would be more 'friendly' for processing to make
it very clear.

We now have
docbook
Oasis docbook variants
Unofficial docbook variants (webside, slides)
and non docbook (my own, I changed one element)

I'd like these to be clearly identified, somehow, to the user.

regards


-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk