OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

docbook message

[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

Those of us who continue to use SGML are kind of forced into opt 2, are we not?
I'd prefer to avoid further divergence between the two versions (SGML/XML).


At 03:34 PM 11/30/01 -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
>/ Eduardo Gutentag <eduardo.gutentag@sun.com> was heard to say:
>| Option 2 makes much more sense to me.
>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?
>| Norman Walsh wrote:
>| >
>| > See 
>| > There appear to be two solutions:
>| >
>| > 1. Use namespaces.
>| >
>| > 2. Force the user to make a top-level choice by having, effectively,
>| >    two DTDs. This would mean a document could contain *either* HTML tables
>| >    *or* CALS tables, but not both.
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
>Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | He who fails to become a giant
>http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | need not remain content with being
>Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | a dwarf.--Ernest Bramah

Mark B. Wroth

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Powered by eList eXpress LLC