Norman Walsh wrote:
/ Dave Pawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
| I wonder what the original reason was, unless it was M$ type of pressure
| to have everything everywhere.
See http://docbook.org/tdg5/en/html/para.html :-)
But more helpfully, consider the following example:
There are times when it may be necessary to frob the foobar. These
can be summarized as follows:
<some table goes here>
where anything that falls outside the boundaries of column 1 must
be considered an error.
Logically, that's a single paragraph with a table in the middle. To
mark that up as two paragraphs with a table in between fails to
capture what the author intended.
Years of struggling with HTML has mostly trained me not to write that
way, or not to worry about the mangled markup that results from making
that three sibling elements, but it's still a rational markup model.
I'm probably being 'too strict' /picky, but two paragraphs and a table
seems right to me (and is what I'd do).
Just an observation.
If the current simpara content had been in para and a new
'messy' / complex model presented (complexpara for want of a better
name) then I'd have ignored complexpara and used the para.
That would allow both options and let the simpler model be used too.
[Or I could start using docbook-- with the content model of simpara
substituted for para]
OK Norm, I'll let this one go.
regards
regards
--
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
