Re: Fw: DOCBOOK: programlisting

[Dave Pawson <daveP@dpawson.freeserve.co.uk>]

At 07:40 16/08/2002, ed nixon wrote:

>My concern is in rushing off to make a seeminly ad hoc change in a less than water-tight development process that will scupper a bunch of people through side effects or exogenous, unmanageable factors (like browser capabilities.) It is all so application and location specific.
>
>I'd almost be tempted to say that, beyond some basic level of support, CSS functionality in the DocBook style sheets should be a matter for customization. And that evolution of the stylesheets in so far as changes deal with CSS, should be in aid of customization and not to directly add CSS functionality. Or am I missing a point that has already been made or is simply understood.
>
>Sorry for the rain on the parade; but it seems to need saying even if it's not the idea that goes forward.

Note Ed, there's no request to docbook yet.

I like it for the following reasons (yet to be fully tested).

1. It meets two needs.
  a) I can style 'standard' class='elementName' stuff as per history.
  b) If implemented, I can do 'specials' for (the original request)
     programlisting's of type X, as apposed to type y.
  both in CSS.

The submission (I won't make it if it won't work on *nix) would
 be to allow some 'other' attribute, specifically for CSS,
 which is then copied through to the html only.
Then it would be the user using CSS who provides the styling.

I don't find it that intrusive, and leave the attribute up to
the docbook comittee.

Sounds reasonable to me. If you have objections, please state them
for discussion.

Regards DaveP.