Re: [docbook] Sections and SimpleSect

["Bob Stayton" <bobs@sagehill.net>]

I have used simplesect just once, and quickly ran into that limitation when
I tried to validate.  A more thorough reading of the DTD clarified the
content model, but I didn't question *why* it was that way.  Perhaps it was
something about not wanting to mix section types in the same element, the
way sect2 and section cannot be mixed.

I quickly abandoned the use of simplesect, though.  After all, any section
element can be terminal if you don't put any other section elements in it.
I'm not sure what the use case was that called for *enforcing* the use of
terminal section elements.

Perhaps it would be a good time to ask if anyone is actually using
simplesect, and how they are using it.  Anyone?

Bob Stayton
Sagehill Enterprises
DocBook Consulting
bobs@sagehill.net


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
To: <docbook@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 3:14 AM
Subject: [docbook] Sections and SimpleSect

> Hello world,
>
> I have misunderstood something about DocBook that's been true
> essentially forever. Or maybe I understood it once and forgot it.
>
> I believed that simplesect was a terminal section inside a component
> (or a section or a sect[1..5]). That is, you could have
>
>   sect1
>     sect2.../sect2
>     simplesect.../simplesect
>   /sect1
>
> but NOT
>
>   sect1
>     simplesect.../simplesect
>     sect2.../sect2
>   /sect1
>
> It turns out that this isn't the case. Simplesect is terminal
> in an even more demanding way: a component or section can contain
> *either* the appropriate level of section element *or* simplesect.
>
> So this is valid:
>
>   sect1
>     simplesect.../simplesect
>   /sect1
>
> but this *IS NOT*
>
>   sect1
>     sect2.../sect2
>     simplesect.../simplesect
>   /sect1
>
> Is there a reason for this? Has anyone else noticed it? Does anyone
> else care? I "fixed" DocBook NG yesterday, but I guess I'll unfix it.
>
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
>
> -- 
> Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | Whatever you may be sure of, be
> http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | sure of this: that you are
> Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | dreadfully like other
>                                    | people.--James Russell Lowell
>