[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook] DocBook SCs
Hi Mike, et al, We have endeavored to simply the content models from full DocBook by including only those elements that make sense for most publishers. As a result, the Publishers schema (which is a customization layer) retains 212 core DocBook elements, removes 149 elements and redefines a handful. We're still trying to crank out an approved spec, but details on the elements are listed here: http://wiki.docbook.org/topic/PublishersMinimalElements?highlight=(publishers) The way we've written the schema (based on DocBook v5.0 using RelaxNG) is in a modular fashion, so if you need any of the technical elements, say to create a book on software, it is easy to include the software module. Any additions we've created are what we have perceived as "gaps" - e.g. poetry and dialogue. The minutes from our meetings are posted here: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook-publishers/ Hope this helps. We would appreciate any additional feedback or participation (you must be an OASIS member to join). Best regards, --Scott Mike Maxwell wrote: > Scott Hudson wrote: >> There isn't a "play" element, but we've added dialogue and poetry. >> Take a look at those and the samples. > > First I'd heard that there was a DocBook subcommittee(s?) for other > kinds of documents. I went to what I guess is the webpage for this > subcommittee: > > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=docbook-publishers > > (there's a page at www.oasis-open.org/committees/, but it seems to be > more general than DocBook). The above page looks to be rather out of > date (next meeting is 2 May last year, and the links to the SC Charter > and the FAQ are broken). Then there's > http://shudson310.blogspot.com/2007/03/docbook-subcommittee-for-publishers.html > which talks about "official DocBook variant_s_" (emphasis mine). Where > are the other variants described, and is there a timeframe for them? > > Where can I go to find out more? The mailing list archives require a > SourceForge account to view them, which I suppose I can create, but > which seems superfluous for read-only access. > > I'll also mention that one of the things that bothers me about the > current DocBook is that it seems to be so oriented towards computer > documentation. Of course one can pare it down, but I wonder why all > those computer-related tags in there in the first place, instead of in > one or more separate add-in modules? In other words, I would like to > use DB for my purpose (grammar writing) by taking a bare-bones DB and > adding any modules I might need, rather than taking a "fat" DB and > modifying my local schema to omit all the tags I don't need. > > Along these lines, the Scope of Work on the SC webpage mentions *adding* > "support for features specific to the publishing industry." My personal > hope is that these additions stay in add-in modules, rather than > increasing the size of the existing DB standard. > > Of course maybe I misunderstand, and my doubts are being addressed in > some other way. > -- > Mike Maxwell > "We signify something too narrow when we say: > Man is a grammatical animal. For although there > is no animal except man with a knowledge of grammar, > yet not every man has a knowledge of grammar." > --Martianus Capella, "The Seven Liberal Arts" > > P.S. Scott: I may be old, but I don't take a metal detector to the > beach. Yet. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]