On Sunday 08 December 2002 03:43 am, Peter Simons wrote:
> After adding the identifier to your system's catalog file, you can
> then validate the XML documents using, for example, xmllint(1) (part
> of libxml2). What will report quite a few errors at the moment, but
> this is what this posting is all about, right? :-)
Looks like there are also a few validity problems with the resulting DocBook,
too.
> So, let me describe the two approaches I can think of to get the DTD
> done:
>
> (1) DocBook provides "hooks", which you can use to extend the DTD.
> There are _numerous_ parameter entities that you can override.
> For example, the element <section> is defined in DocBook like
> this:
[snip...]
> (2) In the BoostBook DTD, we're free to define _any_ elements we want.
> Since the DTD includes the DocBook DTD, those elements can in turn
> contain or refer to any of the DocBook elements.
>
>
> The first approach is IMHO very aesthetic, because we do use the
> machanisms for extensions that were added for exactly this purpose.
> It also makes it very easy for the DocBook guys to eventually import
> our additions to the original DTD -- to the benefit of all users.
>
> The second approach gives us much more power to extend the DTD,
> though. It also means, though, that the resulting documents have to
> use _our_ tags in most places. So you wouldn't write
>
> <book><sect1>...
>
> anymore, but
>
> <boostbook><boostsect1>...
>
> because otherwise the extensions are not available.
Having to duplicate all of DocBook's elements with the "boost" prefix would be
completely unacceptable. We would do well to stick as closely to DocBook as
possible, and I think the process of customizing the DocBook DTD (via option
(1)) will make us think very hard about the areas in which we've strayed from
DocBook.
I think we should go for option #1 all the way, and use the hooks that the
DocBook DTD gives us. Boost documentation should be a pure extension to
DocBook, reusing as much of DocBook as we can, with the eventual goal of
introducing at least some of our changes back into DocBook.
> P. S.: I see that "boost.xml" uses the XInclude module to refer to
> sub-parts of the document via <xi:include .../>. Can I convince you to
> use the "XML way" instead? This would be that you define a parameter
> entity refering to the document:
[snip good reasons]
Sure. We'll use entities instead of XIncludes. The fact that Saxon doesn't
handle XIncludes should have been a warning flag...
Doug
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Boost-docs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe and other administrative requests:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
