Re: [docbook] Allow <info> as root element?

[Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>]

On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 10:55, Thomas Schraitle <tom_schr@web.de> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 30.11.22 00:48, Richard Hamilton wrote:

> IMHO, this is not a real technical issue (which could be theoretically solved
> by adding <info> to the list of start elements) but I suppose it's more of a
> psychological factor. I fear, it would in a way undermine the trust of our
> toolchain. Plus it creates some more burden on writers to dissect when to
> ignore errors and when not.

Or a burden on writers to take care what markup they use?
Sounds reasonable?

Your info 'root', I don't see how reasonable use would invalidate
the use case (multiple) imports into n documents?


>
>
> > The other thing you could do, if youâre using xinclude, is to put the info block into a valid root element, so you can validate it, then use xinclude to include just the info element when you build a deliverable.
>
> Yes, technically possible, but still a restriction. Additionally, I'm forced to
> add an XPointer expression into the <xi:include> element just to select the
> info. Sounds like a detour to me. :)

No, sounds like you making use of xinclude and docbook for your own purposes?
Something many of us do and have done for a long time.

I'm not sure psychological 'barriers' are other than local use constraints?


regards


-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
Docbook FAQ.