Re: [docbook] Inclusion of fragments

[Peter Flynn <peter@silmaril.ie>]

On 18/06/12 21:47, Jirka Kosek wrote:
> On 18.6.2012 21:45, Peter Flynn wrote:
>> On 18/06/12 11:10, Lech Rzedzicki wrote:
>>> You're probably after Docbook Transclusions [1]
>>> [1]http://docbook.org/docs/transclusion/
>>
>> Indeed I am...I knew there would be something I had missed.
> 
> As an author of transclusion draft I should warn you -- it is very
> unlikely that it will become part of DocBook.
> 
> Current thinking in DocBook TC is to rely on XInclude as much as
> possible and even we started effort in W3C to extend XInclude little bit
> (see http://www.w3.org/TR/xinclude-11-requirements/) to support some
> transclusion requirements which are currently impossible with a pure
> XInclude.
> 
> Althoug XInclude is quite baroque to write by hand it has one big
> advantage -- it's directly supported by XML editors. So if your
> requirements can be implemented using XInclude I would go for it.

So long as an extended XInclude can address down to the level of atomic
attribute values, that's fine by me.

///Peter