OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

docbook-tc message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [docbook-tc] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 24 January 2007


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Stayton [mailto:bobs@sagehill.net] 
> Sent: Wednesday, 2007 January 24 19:41
> To: DocBook Technical Committee
> Cc: docbook@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [docbook-tc] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting 
> Minutes: 24 January 2007
> DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 24 January 2007
> =============================================================
> Cals table model does allow info, because Cals controls
> everything inside tgroup,

I don't understand what this is saying.  I think it is
saying that the CALS table model only limits what can
go inside tgroup (not inside table) and info would go
outside tgroup, so having DocBook allow info inside
a table that contains a CALS tgroup is ok.

If that's what the minutes are trying to say, ok, but
it's a bit hard to read them that way, so I wanted to check.

> and HTML table has no tgroup.
> The HTML DTD does not include an info element.
> Bob: DocBook adopted some HTML element names, but made them
> into DocBook elements, and the table cell can contain 
> non-HTML elements,
> so they are not actually HTML tables.

I'm not sure if I disagree with this statement or just
think it is beside the point.  I sure thought the idea
was to allow HTML tables within DocBook, so I'm not
exactly happy with what Bob says above.

> Scott: info would not be displayed by default.
> Norm: concerned that it may break table editing tools, or
> production tools after handoff from one group to another.

It sure will.

> Bob: avoid using out info if it breaks your tool. Unlikely that
> having info in the schema would break the tool.

"If it hurts, don't do it."  Not something I'd like to explain
to my DocBook users, and not a good way to make a DocBook DTD
decision if you ask me.

> Decided to postponse the decision.
> ACTION: Scott to repost to the list.
>       1627845  please allow caption in db.cals.table
> There are two kinds of caption in DocBook. In formal elements,
> it is used for a longer description of the element. In
> HTML tables, caption is used as the table title.
> Proposal: add descriptive caption to cals table and informaltable,
> in parallel with other formal elements.  Approved.
> It was also noticed that the content model of the HTML
> table caption element was just text.  It should be
> equivalent to title.  Proposal: change HTML table caption
> content model to match other titles.  Approved.

Well, that's not an HTML caption and therefore no longer
an HTML table.  You've just broken the idea that we allowed 
HTML tables in DocBook, and you've broken a lot of tools
and processes.


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]