Re: [docbook] Recursive use of elements <option> and <optional>

[Bob Stayton <bobs@sagehill.net>]

Hi,
The best place is github, unless there is no action, in which case you 
can raise it on docbook-apps.

Bob Stayton
Sagehill Enterprises
bobs@sagehill.net

On 12/7/2016 6:23 AM, Jürgen Purtz wrote:
> I opened a new issue at github concerning this problem. What is the
> correct place to communicate: github or oasis e-mail list?
>
> Kind regards
> Jürgen Purtz
>
>
> On 27.06.2016 17:09, Jürgen Purtz wrote:
> > Hallo,
> >
> > as far as I understand the migration from db4 to db5 the definition
> > and content model of "technical inline elements" (%tech.char.class; ?)
> > changed significant. I want to add some comments to their *recursive*
> > use - not to the other aspects of this elements.
> >
> >
> > Positive:
> >
> > In db4 it was able to use <function> ("Function -- The name of a
> > function or subroutine, as in a programming language") recursively. In
> > db5 this is no longer possible. I appreciate this change as a function
> > name is an atomic construct and cannot contain other function names.
> >
> > The same applies to <literal> ("Literal -- Inline text that is some
> > literal value").
> >
> > In db4 it was possible to use <literal> as a subelement of <function>
> > and vice versa. In db5 this is no longer possible. I have seen some
> > situations in our documentation, but they don't make sense and shall
> > be modified by manual intervention.
> >
> >
> > Negative:
> >
> > In db4 it was possible to use <option> and <optional> recusively:
> > <option> within <option> or <option> within <optional> and vice versa.
> > This makes sense as it reflects the real situation of computer
> > languages. In db5 this is no longer valid. As long as there is no
> > other technique to express such computer language situations we need
> > the recursivity as it was defined in db4.
> >
> > In db4 it was possible to use <function> as a subelement of
> > <parameter>. This is no longer possible in db5. Also <funcsynopsis> is
> > not valid within <parameter>. Especially for functional languages like
> > Scala it is natural to use functions as parameters. Therefore the db4
> > semantic makes sense.
> >
> > In summary the content model of all IT related elements shall be reviewed:
> >
> >   * Which elements are really atomic?
> >   * Which elements may contain which other elements, especially
> >     elements of the same kind?
> >
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Jürgen Purtz
> >
> >
> > On 21.06.2016 07:58, Jürgen Purtz wrote:
> > > In docbook 4.x it was possible to use <optional> in a recursive way,
> > > eg:
> > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/sql-createtable.html
> > > or https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/sql-select.html.
> > > Optional elements often are only valid under the additional demand,
> > > that they are part of another optional element. The same holds true
> > > for arguments of commands or procedures.
> > >
> > > We try to upgrade to docbook 5.x, but the schema doesn't allow the
> > > recursive use of <option> and <optional>. Do you have an advice how
> > > to express such situations? Do you have plans to modify the docbook 5
> > > schema to allow recursive use of the two elements?
> > >
> > > Kind Regards
> > > Jürgen Purtz
> > > juergen@purtz.de
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-help@lists.oasis-open.org