OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

docbook message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [docbook] An <appendix> that contains only a <glossary> is not valid (db5_rc7)


Hi,
If you would like to have this issue considered by the DocBook Technical 
Commitee, the way to do that is to file an RFE on the DocBook SourceForge 
site:

https://sourceforge.net/projects/docbook/

You need to be logged into your account there, then select Tracker -> 
RFEs -> Submit New

Getting an account on SourceForge is trivial if you don't already have one.

Bob Stayton
Sagehill Enterprises
bobs@sagehill.net


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Francesco Pretto" <ceztkoml@gmail.com>
To: "Danny Busch" <danny@kurbel.net>
Cc: "Nic Gibson" <nicg@corbas.net>; <docbook@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 3:51 AM
Subject: Re: [docbook] An <appendix> that contains only a <glossary> is not 
valid (db5_rc7)


> 2008/1/16, Danny Busch <danny@kurbel.net>:
>> Francesco Pretto schrieb:
>> > 1) if there's a strong opinion that semantically it does have sense to
>> > have a glossary inside an appendix, just permit to be the only element
>> > of it;
>> > 2) otherwise, just forbid it (and probably even forbid bibliography,
>> > index and toc to be part of an appendix).
>> >
>> There are a lot of books that contain TOCs within Bibliography or
>> Glossarys within normal Chapters. So, the more "recursion" docbook
>> allows, the better is the flexibility to model the books that are
>> around. Especially items from science (jurisprudence, and others) with
>> thousands of footnotes and glossary items need to be structured in a
>> fine granular manner.
>>
>
> So that's fine! Just seen now that <revhistory> can be the only
> element of an appendix, so it's clearer to me that this treatment
> disparity of elements like glossary, toc, index does not have enough
> reasons to subsist. Is there an opinion here to ask for the
> specification to permit <bibliography>, <index>, <glossary>, <toc> to
> be the only element of <appendix>?
> Interesting enough, it would not break anything! :-D
>
> Francesco
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>
> 



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]