[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: DOCBOOK: Re: para versus simpara?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 / "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com> was heard to say: | i'm not clear on the rationale for the <simpara> element. | since it seems to be a restricted version of <para>, does it | have any benefits? i guess, other than that it can be | transformed differently based on a stylesheet. Some users want to prevent paragraphs from containing "block" elements (as HTML does). The simpara element gives them an alternative to para that has the semantics they want. And they can make a customization layer that's a proper subset of DocBook simply by removing the 'para' element from the DTD. Be seeing you, norm - -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | In science, "fact" can only mean http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | "confirmed to such a degree that Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | it would be perverse to withhold | provisional assent." I suppose | that apples might start to rise | tomorrow, but the possibility does | not merit equal time in physics | classrooms.--Stephen J. Gould -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/> iD8DBQE+B3QQOyltUcwYWjsRAguLAKCftqnmYvNdKtwbfMxfUVp1r1XKWgCfSmcV 3axdF2IGy/+ehjNbqj/lEFc= =Ymiv -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC