[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Issues with processing expectations of the proposedannotation element
On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 07:43:38AM -0400, Norman Walsh wrote: > / Yann Dirson <ydirson@fr.alcove.com> was heard to say: > | How do people feel <annotation> would relate to <footnote> and <remark> ? > > You might sell me on deprecating remark in favor of a class of > annotation, but I think footnote should stay. It already exists, it > has well understood semantics, and it has a related footnoteref > element. Yes, there is <footnoteref>. But isn't it just some particular sort of <xref> ? I can easily see in xref processing expectations something like: If the cross-referenced element is an Annotation, which is to be rendered as a footnote, the Xref is probably to be rendered in the same way the primary location of the footnote Annotation is. -- Yann Dirson <Yann.Dirson@fr.alcove.com> http://www.alcove.com/ Technical support manager Responsable de l'assistance technique Senior Free-Software Consultant Consultant senior en Logiciels Libres Debian developer (dirson@debian.org) Développeur Debian
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC