Re: [docbook-apps] DocBook specializations

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

On Thu, 2006-03-02 at 09:58 +0100, Jirka Kosek wrote:
> Camille Bégnis wrote:
> 
> > With DocBook V5 on sight, people will be much more likely to customize
> > the DTD, and not simply use the "role" attribute. While this is great in
> > an information coding point of view it poses the problem of
> > interoperability, Customized DocBook is not really DocBook anymore right?
> 
> I don't think that interoperability is problem here.
I did this shortly after v 5 was announced.
As soon as I made a 'customisation' that was not valid (to the docbook
schema)
Jirka jumped on me (from a great height) making sure I understood what 
a customisation is?

So (with our definition, i.e. simplification, and no additions)
then 'Customized DocBook is  really DocBook'
if you see what I mean?

> 
> > Would it makes sense to provide customization developers a best
> > practices guide, and a "DocBook Specializations Repository" where people
> > could contribute their customized schemas and stylesheets to handle
> > specific requirements, by metier for example?
Like you, I didn't understand (clearly enough)
what customisation meant.

I do now.

So perhaps a few paragraphs explaining it (in simple English,
for simple people like me) would help?


regards 

-- 
Regards, 

Dave Pawson
XSLT + Docbook FAQ
http://www.dpawson.co.uk