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] Re: Equations and figures as descendants of an example

On 10/12/13 15:57, Norman Walsh wrote:
Erik Leunissen <e.leunissen@hccnet.nl> writes:
I've construed a docbook 5.0 xml document whose structure appears to
be invalid because it holds <equation>'s and <figure>'s as descendants
of an <example>.

- I'm curious about the rationale regarding this being invalid.

I think, generally speaking, it would be unsual to see a titled figure
nested inside a titled example. How, for example, would you label such
a figure?

First off: I feel a bit uncomfortable that I don't quite grasp the reason that you asking these questions. Maybe there is an implicit misunderstanding. I'm going to try to be explicit ...

I didn't think of anything different at all for the label than those of other figures in the document. I don't see why I would want that to be different.

What's your motivation for putting figures and equations inside an

I've got the feeling that asking for a motivation is like turning the world upside down. Have you never seen a theoretical exposition in a textbook that clarifies it's theory with an example, where a figure is used (regardless titles, regardless figure labels)?

Before I continue, I'd like to check whether there is anything wrong with my understanding. Maybe it's the case that you mean something quite different with an <example> than I do?

Best regards,

Erik Leunissen.

                                         Be seeing you,

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