So if we take this:
On Mar 1, 2006, at 2:58 AM, Oliver Specht wrote:
Hi,
CPHennessy wrote:
This sounds quite interesting, is there already an example to play
with (even if it is another element)?
No, there isn't any example yet.
... and this (confusing, but the levels are Oliver/CPH/Me/Oliver):
Such fields can only be formatted as a whole. It is not possible to
have
e.g. parts of this presentation printed in bold. This text can not
be
spanned over paragraphs. The text cannot be changed manually.
Is this limitation acceptable for the biblio users ?
Unfortunately, no. We need to be able to place full formatted
footnotes in the cite:citation-body element in some cases.
A more general question, though, is whether fields really ought to be
just text strings. It seems to me there could be a general case to
be made for "rich text" capability within text fields, particularly
depending on where we end up with the current metadata + custom
solution discussion at the TC.
You are right. Fields should be more powerful. Also for MS
interoperability they need to be changed. But this is not a simple
task.
What shall we do? CPH is willing (time permitted) to explore coding
this it seems, but it also seems he needs some help at least in the
form of advice and (preferably) example code.
Is there any consensus at Sun that enhancing fields is a priority?
Bruce
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
