Re: Proposal for "cover"

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

/ Dave Pawson <davep@dpawson.co.uk> was heard to say:
| On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 14:10 -0500, Norman Walsh wrote:
|> In response to RFE 1416903[1], the TC agreed to add a "cover" element
|> to "info". The purpose of "cover" is to contain the front and back
|> cover copy of a book. The element is designed to be general enough to
|> support any possible combination of front, inside-front, inside-back,
|> back, dust jacket, dust jacket foldovers, spine, etc.
|> 
|> Accordingly, the processing expectations of "cover" will be fairly
|> loose.
>
| Loose as in 'configurable', as per the main cover?

Loose as in, we aren't going to try to say that the first cover
element is for the front cover, the second is for the back cover, etc.
(Though I expect those will be reasonable defaults.)

If you want to do fancier things (dust jackets, inside and outside
covers, etc.), you'll have 'role' at your disposal.

| The 'cover' I was thinking of was the 4th page (for an O'Reilly)
| which has the bibliographers/librarians 'stuff'
| I.e. the formal title, revision, Print history etc.
| I think Norm's list covers that pretty well.

I think everything for that is already available in the info.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | Man's sensitivity to little things
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | and insensitivity to the greatest
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | are the signs of a strange
                                   | disorder.-- Pascal

PGP signature