[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook-tc] Associations in an assembly
Scott Hudson <scott.hudson@pelco.com> writes: > I agree that the relationship type and association type should not hold > human readable content, like titles. I also think you are spot on in > suggesting that info be added to relationship to provide a title for the > relationship! Then association starts to feel like an attribute to me. > So, our example should really be something like: > <relationship linkend="xidi.help.system" type="help_intro"> > <info> > <title>New User Introduction<title> > <abstract><para>This is a path through the help system. It is not > meaningful outside of the help system. Notice that the ids referenced by > the instances are on modules in the help system, not on the > resources.</para></abstract> > </info> > <association>path</association> > <instance linkend="help.xidi.overview"/> > <instance linkend="help.svn.overview"/> > <instance linkend="help.ex.new.help.sys"/> > </relationship> > > Truth be told, I've had a hard time understanding the difference between > relationship@type and association. I think they serve a similar purpose, and > would lean more toward the element than the attribute... Anyway, Larry pushed back a bit and I feel like I was stepping out of bounds making too many changes without WG approval, so I went back to association and took out info. I plan to publish V5.1b1 momentarily, so we'll have lots to talk about later in the month! :-) Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Abandoning rhyme and fixed rules http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | in favor of other intuitive rules Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | brings us back to fixed rules and | to rhyme with renewed | respect.--Jean Cocteau
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]