[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [docbook] Allowing arbitrary elements as the root of a DocBook document
David, I've wondered this as well. Right now, I create <para> objects as containers for the <table>. Maybe it is a question of overhead -- as in how much work is involved in maintaining more root elements? Regards, Norma ________________________________________ From: David Cramer [david@thingbag.net] Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 11:02 AM To: docbook@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [docbook] Allowing arbitrary elements as the root of a DocBook document Users sometimes want to create DocBook documents such that some arbitrary element is the root (e.g. <table>) and then xinclude that file into a larger doc more than one time. The motivation is to avoid the need to put an id on the element but still be able to refer to it from an xi:include. The hitch is that if they validate this standalone file against the DocBook schema, it's not valid because it doesn't have book, chapter, section, etc as a root element. I've customized the schema in the past and am about to do that again, but it makes me wonder, what is the rational for only allowing a few elements to be the root of a DocBook document. If I want to create a DocBook document that has <table> or even <phrase> as its root element, why shouldn't it be considered valid? Regards, David --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]