[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: Re: any reason why a "procedure" is not a child of "para"?
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Steven Cogorno wrote: > Robert P. J. Day said: > > consider a possible para: > > > > <para>If you want to start writing in DocBook, here are the > > steps you'll need to do: > > <procedure> > > .... > > </procedure> > > </para> > > > > this makes perfect sense, and it's clear that the <procedure> > > element logically belongs within the paragraph. > > So tag it as: > > <procedure> > <para> If you want to start writing in DocBook, here are the > steps you'll need to do:</para> > <step>...</step> > </procedure> no way. that most definitely does not *logically* represent what i'm trying to say. and it additionally does not allow me to have a procedure within a <para> so that i can have *trailing* information after the procedure but before the end of the para. (that is, a procedure must end with (step)+, and nothing else.) enough. as dilbert once said to a co-worker, "um ... this is where you agree with me and we move on." rday
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]