[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: Technical DTDs vs. non-technical
>DocBook was "primarily written for books about computer software and hardware". "Because its main structures correspond to the general notion of what constitutes a "book,", it is assumed that it automatically addresses the needs of Literature in general. Not really; it was a design goal (of mine) to make Docbook suitable also for scholarly publishing. So if you toss out all the computer- related inlines and structures, and ignore some things like QandASet that you probably don't need, you ought to have a DTD that you can use to format a scholarly book. If you find deficiencies we'd like to hear of them. Several folks pointed you to TEI, and remarked that it's mostly oriented to analysis - and if that's what you want, then you should use TEI. For example, if you want to mark up <couplet> you need TEI; if you only want to typeset a poem, <literallayout> will do. TEI also covers genres Docbook doesn't, such as plays and (I think) dictionary entries. regards, Terry
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC