Re: [docbook] Ruminations on the future of DocBook

[Dave Pawson <dpawson@nildram.co.uk>]

At 15:57 30/05/2003 -0400, Adam Turoff wrote:
>On Fri, May 30, 2003 at 03:05:38PM -0500, Jeff Biss wrote:
> > This does make sense for the reasons you provide. The DocBook really
> > trys to provide the elements that any given discilpline requires but at
> > a maintenance cost. Can you provide an example as to how
> > <dbjava:methodsynopsis> and <dbperl::methodsynopsis> would be
> > differentiated in a document? Or is it as obvious as
> > <dbjava:methodsynopsis>doSomething</dbjava:methodsynopsis>? Does the
> > dbxxxx part provide the differentiation required for processing?
>
>Yes.  That's it.  The dbjava: and dbperl: in my examples are two
>namespaces that would include a (different) <methodsynopsis> element.
>The semantic meaning, processing expectations and content modules would 
>differ.

Doesn't architectural forms provide a solution to this?
syntax is different, but with a mapping pi the two could make good use of
the same styling?
   See Arjun Rays excellent example on xml-dev this week.

regards DaveP