Re: DOCBOOK: Re: any reason why a "procedure" is not a child of "para"?

[Jeff Biss <jeff@marco-inc.com>]

Tim,

You're correct. I have been using <para> as <simpara>. Then Mr
Day has a good point and I have been confusing the issue. Sorry.

Jeff Biss

Tim Waugh wrote:
> 20030312172043.GL1092@redhat.com">
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2003 at 10:53:53AM -0600, Jeff Biss wrote:
>
> > Here's my 2 cents:
> >
> > I see no reason that a procedure should be a child of a paragraph. The 
> > paragraph immediately preceding a procedure would reference that 
> > procedure. Why would one need to put a procdure inside a paragraph?
> >
> > This is clear:
> >
> > ...To install the software perform the following procedure:
> >
> > 1. Insert the installation disk in the drive.
> > 2. Another step
> >
> > This is not so clear:
> >
> > ...To install the software: 1. Insert the installation disk in the 
> > drive. 2. Allow the setup program to launch. If it does not launch you....
> >     
>
> I think you're confusing <para> with <simpara>.  A <para> is not a
> single textual paragraph, but a grouping of elements that constitute
> an idea.  It's typically used in the same way that <simpara> is, but
> it's very often used like this:
>
> <para>It's very often used like this:
>  <itemizedlist>...
>
> Tim.
> */
>