[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] Indexterms with one or more See elements
I think the reference to "at least one <see> entry" is probably a typo, because the grammar only allows one <see> element in an indexterm. It should be possible (but maybe not too easy) to get the Chicago Manual style with a stylesheet customization that looks for multiple indexterms with the same term(s) and <see> elements. That approach doesn't change the grammar, but would give you the visual result you want. However, it's not unreasonable to allow multiple <see> elements on one <indexterm>. If you think that's important, you can propose an RFE (Request for Enhancement) on either SourceForge or (preferably) Github for consideration in the next revision of the DocBook standard. If you're not sure how to do that (or don't have permissions), let me know, and I'll file one (I think it's worth considering). Best regards, Dick Hamilton ------- XML Press XML for Technical Communicators http://xmlpress.net email@example.com On Jan 8, 2016, at 6:52, Pc Thoms <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > While working on a legacy project I found the following to be valid: > > <indexterm><primary>Engineers</primary><see>Institution</see></indexterm> > <indexterm><primary>Engineers</primary><see>North of England</see></indexterm> > > This produces an entry that appears as > > Engineers (see Institution) (see North of England) > > and usually the see would italicized in an index. > > However, the following is does not validate. > > <indexterm><primary>Engineers</primary><see>Institution</see><see>North of England</see></indexterm> > > On the page, http://docbook.org/tdg51/en/html/indexterm.singular.html, there is reference to "if there is at least one see entry for a particular term." This to my mind implies that there may one or more see references. > > When consulting the Chicago Manual, Edition 17, the first example is an entry with see two different entries, as follows: > > adolescence. See teenagers; youth > > Edition 16, however, has only single see entries in its' examples.