[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [docbook] <emphasis> in <code>; syntax highlighting
This isn't directly an answer to the original question, but is something that might be useful and the xsl gives examples of the approach Mike suggests. A while back, Norm posted an xsl to convert the output of htmlize.el (which converts an emacs buffer's font-locking to html) to docbook with some role attributes. Norm's original message got munged, so see these two for the whole story: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/docbook-apps/2003-q4/msg00562.html http://sources.redhat.com/ml/docbook-apps/2003-q4/msg00549.html David > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Smith [mailto:smith@xml-doc.org] > Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 3:40 AM > To: docbook@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: [docbook] <emphasis> in <code>; syntax highlighting > > > Instead of <emphasis>, why not just use another, nested <code> or > a <literal>? e.g., <code>foo <code role="prgkey">bar</code></code> > > --Mike > > "Justus H. Piater" <Justus.Piater@ULg.ac.be> writes: > > > Hi, > > > > Is there a reason why <emphasis> is not allowed inside <code> (or, > > %gen.char.class is not part of %cptr.char.mix;, or whatever)? > > > > I think there are many legitimate uses for that, and I miss it > > badly. In general, I think that <code> should allow all > > inline-formatted content that <programlisting> allows. > > > > Likewise, it would make a lot of sense to allow <emphasis> inside > > other %cptr.char.mix; clients such as <userinput> and > > <computeroutput>. > > > > Can an appropriate change be put into V4.3? > > > > > > This is actually part of a bigger need of mine: I put lots > of program > > code examples into my lecture slides. Lacking tags for (program) > > keywords, operators, comments, strings etc., I (ab)use > <emphasis> for > > syntax highlighting, using roles such as "prgkey", "prgcomment" etc. > > > > It would be nice to have tags for such things. On the other hand, > > quite a few of those would need to be added in various > places, adding > > substantial complexity to the DTD. This seems to be a prime > candidate > > for a future extension module of a modular DocBook. > > > > For now, using <emphasis> may not be all that abusive, if > you view it > > like the term syntax *highlighting* indicates: visual sugar for a > > human reader. > > > > Justus > > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a post to > docbook-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org, or visit http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]