Re: DOCBOOK: DocBook: lists within lists

[Brendan J Simon <Brendan.Simon@ctam.com.au>]

Norman Walsh wrote:

> / Brendan J Simon <Brendan.Simon@ctam.com.au> was heard to say:
> | It seems I can only put lists within certain types of lists.  ie. any
> | lists that uses the <listitem> element can contain any type of list.  I
> | am trying to put a segmentedlist within a segmentedlist but it seems the
> | docbook specification does not allow this.
> | Is this correct ?
> | Are there any work arounds ?
>
> No one has ever asked for nested segmented lists, or lists
> within segmented lists. I don't recall if they are absent by
> design or oversight. Can you explain why you want to do this?

What's so unusual about having a list within a list ?
A segmentedlist is no different to any other type of list, as far as I'm
concerned.

> | Is there anyway to make the different list types more generic in there
> | syntax.  I would like to be able to change to a different list type by
> | just changing the outer level markup tag/s.  ie. change sortedlist to
> | orderedlist to segmentedlist to simplelist .....
>
> ItemizedList and OrderedList can be changed back and forth that way,
> because they are basically isomorphic. The structure of VariableList
> and SegmentedList are completely different, it wouldn't make sense to
> try to "quickly" turn them into numbered lists or bulleted lists.

I am new to DocBook and the structure of the segmentedlist seems a bit
unintuative to me.  I probably am misusing it or misunderstanding the purpose
of the segmentedlist.
To me, all the different list types perform the same role, with a different
output style.

Anyway, I've changed the document to use itemized lists instead.  I just use
<emphasis> to get my keyword emphasised.
BTW : <emphasis role="bold"> doesn't still causes italics output for me.  Is
this correct ?

Thanks,
Brendan Simon.