Re: [docbook] Re: DocBook Annotations

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

On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 16:46 -0800, John L. Clark wrote:

> 
> I am uncomfortable primarily because insofar as a subtree is defined by
> its root name, attributes, and content, when a child of that root is
> given semantics which describe the whole subtree, in effect that
> description also applies to the child node (which is doing the
> describing in the first place).  I don't think that's what
> we want in this case.
For alt, the alt content is sibling to the item for which the
alternative is provided, as per Norms examples?

> 
> While this may not be XML canon, I generally think of child nodes as
> "composing" the subtree rooted at their collective parent.  But as I
> imagine the semantics of the alt and annotation elements, they do not
> seem to help "compose" this subtree so much as "describe" it.  Thus, I
> would really like to see such annotations "outside" the subtree.
Until Jeni brings lmnl to fruition, I can't see that being realised.



> 
> It seems to me that annotations participate in a relationship with the
> subtree that they annotate.  Relationships are usually modeled as
> tuples, and I'd like to do the same here.  I went through a number of
> designs where I attempted to model the tuples explicitly, using a common
> parent, but it always ended up too verbose and too far removed from the
> flow of information.

Downside of the 'simple' nature of the SGML model on which most of this
is based? 


> 
> What I would like to suggest, therefore, is a different
> application-level semantic than I have typically seen before.  I would
> like to specify that annotations modify not their parent, but their
> previous sibling.

> 
> which simply strikes me as odd (the annotation of the phrase is "part
> of" the phrase?), one would have:
> 
>   <para>Modern browsers display acronym expansions and link titles as
>   "<phrase>tool tips</phrase><annotation>
>     <title>Tool Tips</title>

To me that looks odd.


> Further, I think that there should be an option to allow annotations to
> pick their targets using the IDREF mechanism that you would expect,
> should the author want to place them elsewhere. 


I think that's where footnotes come in? To meet that expectation?


regards DaveP