[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: Re: RFE 472229: Allow HTML Tables in DocBook
On Fri, Nov 30, 2001 at 03:34:36PM -0500, Norman Walsh wrote: > / Eduardo Gutentag <eduardo.gutentag@sun.com> was heard to say: > | Option 2 makes much more sense to me. > > Why? > > My thoughts are: > > 1. We're moving towards more modular, reusable documentation. Sooner or later, > probably sooner, someone's going to want to include a fragment that uses one > table model along with a fragment that uses the other. And that won't be > possible. > > 2. This is exactly the problem namespaces are supposed to solve, isn't it? :-) > > 3. Won't tool vendors have to support mixed namespaces "real soon now" > anyway, for things like XLink, SVG, MathML, etc. So tools will > actually be able to handle this? Namespaces sound great, but perhaps some more details about how namespaces would be used in DocBook would help. Then we could better understand what impacts they would have on current tools and files. bobs Bob Stayton 400 Encinal Street Publications Architect Santa Cruz, CA 95060 Technical Publications voice: (831) 427-7796 Caldera International, Inc. fax: (831) 429-1887 email: bobs@caldera.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC