Re: [docbook] Article in Set not Allowed: Why?

["Bob Stayton" <bobs@sagehill.net>]

Hi Thomas,
I think up to now putting a collection of articles in a book was considered 
sufficient.  Originally, set was defined as a container for multiple books 
so that xrefs between books could be validated, since such links have to be 
in the same document (ID/IDREF).  More recently, someone submitted an RFE 
and made the case for allowing nested sets, supplying a use case that made 
sense to the DocBook TC.  If you want set to contain article, you could file 
an RFE on the DocBook SourceForge site and present your case.  The TC 
considers all RFEs that are submitted.

Bob Stayton
Sagehill Enterprises
bobs@sagehill.net

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Thomas Schraitle" <tom_schr@web.de>
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 4:54 AM
To: <docbook@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [docbook] Article in Set not Allowed: Why?

> Hi,
>
> according to the TDG[1], set allows another set or book, but no
> article. I'm wondering if there is any reason for this. Just curiosity. :)
>
> It would probably convenient to allow articles in a set. Currently, a
> writer is forced to add articles into a book, although they may not fit
> thematically together.
>
> What do you think?
>
> ------
> [1] http://www.docbook.org/tdg/en/html/set.html
>
> --
> Gruß/Regards,
>    Thomas Schraitle
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-help@lists.oasis-open.org