Re: Ruminations on the future of DocBook

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

/ Dave Pawson <dpawson@nildram.co.uk> was heard to say:
| At 11:31 31/05/2003 -0400, ed nixon wrote:
|
|> For example, what about a mapping of DocBook elements to XHTML
|> elements? As a first approximation of a "core" set? It would likely
|> be many-to-one in most cases. DocBook is richer with respect to
|> XHTML, but that DocBook subset, call it a *new* SDocBook might be a
|> good starting point to look at modularization with respect to other,
|> more specific, more rich
|>requirements for other forms of technical documentation.
|
| And quite possibly it would meet the needs of ??? 70% of docbook users?
| I.e. all those who mark up in docbook and present in (X)HTML?

Simplified DocBook was designed specifically with the goal of being as
small as possible and roughly analogous to HTML. (i.e. to have about
the same number of tags as HTML)

But I don't think it makes a very good platform to build upon. It's
just too flat.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

- -- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | The fact of having been born is
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | bad augury for
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | immortality.--Santayana
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iD8DBQE/Es9vOyltUcwYWjsRAsaRAJ456eLQl3/8H4v7xzE0zADL9uhCWQCgiVHb
+DtYze2CHCkxwvGxP0xqfB0=
=Jjyo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----