I think the table is adding valid semantic structure here. It allows the
figure numbering to exist at the Docbook level, not in SVG.
Maybe use <figure> elements inside an <informaltable>? You could wrap the
informaltable in an example to give the entire set of diagrams a title.
Peter
<informaltable>
<tgroup cols="2">
<tbody>
<row>
<entry><figure>
<title>Chemical One</title>
<mediaobject>
<imageobject>
<imagedata fileref="1.svg"/>
</imageobject>
</mediaobject>
</figure></entry>
<entry><figure>
<title>Chemical Two</title>
<mediaobject>
<imageobject>
<imagedata fileref="2.svg"/>
</imageobject>
</mediaobject>
</figure></entry>
</row>
</tbody>
</tgroup>
</informaltable>
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018, 08:28 Thomas Schraitle <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am Freitag, 12. Oktober 2018, 14:12:15 CEST schrieb Bernhard Kleine:
> > In my second mail to this threat a showed a complex table with
> > structures, arrows labeling etc. I cannot envisage this without a table
> > structure.
>
> As Dave already pointed out, a table might not be the appropriate way to
> layout things.
>
> Have you considered SVG? With SVG (or any other vector format) you can do
> all
> the fancy stuff (arrows, labeling etc.) that you need.
>
>
> --
> Gruß/Regards
> Thomas Schraitle
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
