Re: [docbook-tc] Re: RFE 3107140

[Gershon Joseph <gerjosep@cisco.com>]

I agree this is a bit heavy, but at least the markup is clear and the content is easily translatable, even by machine translation. I vote for this. I'm assuming there is no need for full-featured acronym and term expansion that the glossary entry markup introduced in DITA 1.2 supports.

Gershon

On Jun 16, 2011, at 11:19 PM, Norman Walsh wrote:

> "Bob Stayton" <bobs@sagehill.net> writes:
>> etc.).  So it seems just adding <expansion> to the existing mix would
>> have to be done, with the explanation that its location in the content
>> is arbitrary and it may or may not be output, which seems a bit
>> awkward.  What do you think?
> 
> I think we may have to put the wrapper in the other way:
> 
> <expansion>
>  <acronym>NASA</acronym>
>  <alt>National Aeronautics and Space Administration</alt>
> </expansion>
> 
> But that seems awfully heavy.
> 
>                                        Be seeing you,
>                                          norm
> 
> -- 
> Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | The shoe that fits one person
> http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | pinches another; there is no
> Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | recipe for living that suits all
>                                   | cases.-- Jung