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

*Subject*: **Re: DOCBOOK: Re: linuxdoc to docbook migration**

*From*:**Douglas du Boulay <ddb@R3401.rlem.titech.ac.jp>***To*: docbook@lists.oasis-open.org*Date*: Fri, 01 Feb 2002 11:28:22 +0900 (JST)

> / Douglas du Boulay <ddb@R3401.rlem.titech.ac.jp> was heard to say: > | (1) The control file for the program caters for a huge variety of > | alternative behaviour. A very large number of default options > | are built into the program and these often have a redundant "command argument" > | which forces the required behaviour. In the original linuxdoc document I used > | the <sf> serif font tag to identify such default command arguments. > | I am hoping there will be a more apropriate docbook alternative to highlight > | user commands which are defaults. > > Can you provide a little more context? I'm not sure what sort of > commands you mean. An XTAL example of mine. There is a subprogram ADDREF which works with irel, frel or f2rl data. "frel" is the default data type so the two commands ADDREF and ADDREF frel work identically. I would like a <command> notation that reflects that "frel" is a default/redundant/built-in option, which could ultimately be rendered in some special font/face/colour/type. A unix man page example. The command enscript -1 .... creates a postscript file from a text file with 1 column per page. The option "-1" is redundant, being the default (between -1, -2 ... . But is there a <command> tag wich denotes "-1" as the default optional argument? > > | (2) (i) to get html superscripts and subscripts for both footnotes, table > > For footnotes, you should switch to the <footnote> element that will provide > the marks for you automatically. That would look and work much better I'm sure :-) > > | footnotes (e.g. [<sup>1</sup>]) and mathematical notation > | (e.g. [F<sup>2<sup>]), I abused the linuxdoc.dtd <f></f> notation. > | (remapped as []) > > For mathematics, it's a little harder. If all you need are sub and > superscripts, you can use subscript and superscript. > > | (ii) I also had to abuse the [] notation to get greek symbols in > | the body of the text e.g. [α] . > > I'm not sure what you mean by [] notation. Sorry I mean the <f></f> inline formula notation - (remapped as []) Items originally denoted as [F<sup>2<sup>] are not strictly equations or formulae, but are still mathematical entities in the text. So just replacing it with F<superscript>2</superscript> is technically incorrect because if this were to go to print in book form -at some point in the future, the "F" should be in some mathematical italic font. To change it to "F<superscript>2</superscript>" I have lost information. To go to 20 lines of MathML markup for each instance seems an incredible amount of overkill. What to do? what to do? Is there a half way house somewhere? Some temporary <inline-partial-formula> placeholder to enable complete conversion to MathML at some point in the future, while rendering as italic text in the present? What is the absolute minimum amount of <inline-equation>.. info needed to get an italic superscript text representation for such a simple notation? And are there any problems with just dropping the odd iso-entity α into the body of the text (I'm probably wrong but I don't thing greek mathematical characters get italicised in general)? > > Ah. Yes. There is a lot of math. Hmm...historically, DocBook hasn't > allowed text for math (we were waiting for someone to standardize math > markup :-). But a lot of your equations appear to be greek letters, > sub and superscripts, and a few other symbols. No reason why that > couldn't be text. This adds weight to the argument in favor of adding > text as an alternative in inline equations and equations. > > Be seeing you, > norm How do the "professionals" deal with this? Has Docbook never been used by O'Reilly to publish scientific texts? I thought that was the whole point? Thanks again for your help Doug (in puzzlement)

**References**:**DOCBOOK: Re: linuxdoc to docbook migration***From:*Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>

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

Powered by eList eXpress LLC