[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Stylesheet RFC -- "description" meta tag in html
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> writes: > I wasn't suggesting Abstract because I wanted to shoehorn it into > some existing element, I was suggesting it because I really think > the content is semantically an abstract. Yes -- it is. > Perhaps > > <abstract role="htmlmeta"><simpara>...</simpara></abstract> I don't even know if you have to go this far. Wouldn't this require a change to the Docbook DTD? I can't decide if this is necessary or not. Sometimes documents may have abstracts which seem inappropriately large for putting in a description HTML META field. You have interaction with chunking too. Sectional elements can have abstract, can't they? so it would be nice to take the ancestor's abstract, or fallback to <bookinfo> or whatever. -- .....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC