Re: [docbook-tc] assembly info proposal

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

On 16 January 2012 17:54, Bob Stayton <bobs@sagehill.net> wrote:

>
> I believe that the <info> element name cannot be disambiguated in this
> situation.  No matter how we document it, some people will interpret it as
> the opposite of what we intend.  I would suggest we avoid using it in this
> context.
>
> So I would suggest the following:
>
> 1.  For metadata about the assembly elements themselves, give them explicit
> element names similar to those used in DocBook 4:
>
> assemblyinfo
> structureinfo
> moduleinfo
> resourcesinfo
> descriptioninfo
> resourceinfo
> relationshipsinfo
> transformsinfo
> transforminfo
> relationshipinfo
> instanceinfo
> associationinfo
> outputinfo
> filterininfo
> filteroutinfo
>
> If the committee feels that is too many new elements, we could use
> assemblyinfo for all of them.

+1 to too many new elements?
Though filterout/assemblyinfo... seems misplaced?

>I believe that the <info> element name cannot be disambiguated in this situation.  No matter how we document it, some people will interpret it as the opposite of what we intend.  I would suggest we avoid using it in this context.

given
 filterout/assemblyinfo
or
 filterout/info I'd prefer the latter. It may not be easy to disambiguate,
but it is consistent with the rest of docbook and a marked improvement
on <prefix>info?

regards



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