[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook-tc] =?utf-8?q?=22Kahl=C3=BAa=22?= comments
/ Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz> was heard to say: | Norman Walsh wrote: | |> | Or we can go even further and declare named pattern for value of |> | attribute: |> | |> | db.classsynopsis.attribute.class.value = "class" | "interface" |> | db.classsynopsis.attribute.class = attribute class { |> | db.classsynopsis.attribute.class.value } |> | |> | DocBook extension will then be even more easier |> | |> | include "docbook.rnc" |> | { |> | db.classsynopsis.attribute.class.value |= "abstractclass" |> | } |> Uhm. Yeah. I don't know if it makes sense to go that far or not. | | There are several uses cases from history. Attributes that are defined | by enumerations are time to time extended to allow new values. At the | same time customizations of DocBook often also add new permitted | values. If we will use design approach that I proposed, the | customization can be used without any changes also with newer version | of DocBook schema as it only adds new values. It doesn't contain whole | list of permitted values which can evolve with each released version | of DocBook and can easily go out-of-sync in customization. | | I think that this design approach is worth using at least for | attributes that are defined as enumerations (usually class attribute | on various elements). There's no reason not to use it, I suppose. I'm convinced. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Some people will never learn http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | anything, for this reason, because Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | they understand everything too | soon.-- Pope
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]