[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook] Whatever happened too CSS+XML?
> I know this sentence, actually I typed it on the same keyboard as this > email message ;-) Wow... don't I feel an idiot! Heh. > And although you can *technically* place > XHTML link or image inside DocBook document, it is nonsense because > DocBook has native elements for links and images. Moreover DocBook > markup is usually much more powerful and semantically richer then > similar XHTML markup. I know... but is it really that wrong to combine the two like this? Is there no way of conceivably mixing the two in harmony? Perhaps a <html:a> embedded in a <link> etc? A bit hacky I know - but you don't loose any semantics. What would be the harm of using only <html:table>, <html:img> and <html:a> in replacements of the DocBook elements in your document to produce a perfectly valid document which could be rendered by most browsers? Are you *really* loosing a significant amount of that semantic goodness that is oh-so-important? While DocBook is more descriptive in many ways (with images for example) the overall semantics are the same. Does it really matter which namespace it belongs to in this instance? -- "Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results." - R. Stallman