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] RFE #1998852: Provide a mechanism to group parameters.

Norman Walsh wrote:
> The DocBook TC is considering solutions to RFC 1998852 which asks
> for a mechanism to group method parameters.
> Instead of creating new elements for this purpose, it was suggested
> that we already have a group element that we could use for this
> purpose. (It already serves an analagous role in grouping arguments in
> a cmdsynopsis.)
> The results can be seen in this experimental customization layer:

> And its accompanying test document:

> </article>
> This seems a perfectly tractable answer, but its worth noting that
> this would be the first case of an element with two distinct,
> unrelated content models. (We already use multiple patterns for the
> same element to handle validation of some attribute co-constraints,
> but those are much more closely related, or at least they feel that
> way to me.)
> Does anyone think that this would be confusing?
> Technically, there is no way to represent this in DTD syntax and,
> though it could be represented in XSD, our current method of
> generating the XSD would not be able to cope. But I'm inclined to
> think that we shouldn't feel constrained by the limitations of DTDs
> and perhaps we need to build a better XSD in any event.

rng wise looks good. I don't feel any antipathy towards overloading
the group element. Common purpose even if a different 'place' in the 

Am I right in thinking that so far, we've been OK with 'backwards'
translation to both DTD and xsd?

I'm a little more than 50% supportive of retaining that
ability, sensing that people happily quote that docbook works
with XSD.

I shan't shout if you go with this solution, just a little
concerned that some users (those locked into W3C/MS worlds) who
are xsd bound might hurt if this breaks that assumption?

"perhaps we need to build a better XSD in any event"
Does that mean something other than Jing to go from .rng to .xsd?



Dave Pawson

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