[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook] questions about the future of docbook (ng)...
HAMILTON,DICK (HP-FtCollins,ex1) wrote: > Stefan, > > Thanks for pointing out this project. It's the first > I'd heard about it. > > I took a quick look at the templates and I actually > think most, if not all, of the needed vocabulary is > already in docbook as it exists today. Oh, really ? Hmm, I was thinking of entities such as project, task, role, usecase, requirement, specification, principle, issue, model, release, target, etc. which are currently not covered. May be some of them could be forced into existing concepts (if we really try hard), but IMO that wouldn't be a good idea. In the same way Norm insists that docbook isn't a modeling language (and thus shouldn't go any further in its support of UML and programming language artefacts) I believe the richer semantics the above entities have *in this particular domain* should be kept in a separate profile (or however you call it). Regards, Stefan
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]