2008/10/29 Dave Pawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hudson, Scott wrote: >> >> Thanks for the feedback. Now, what to call it? drama? (what if it's a >> comedy?) play? script? > > <drama> which is the general definition as per dictionary. role attribute > available if needed. > > >> >> I think the part level sounds intriguing, section makes sense. Both? >> Preference? > > Confusion? With current docbook part? What semantics did you have? > Or did you mean to have 'drama' at the same docbook hiearchical level as > part? > > I'd seek advice on this one. Norm? > > >> >> Any additional markup needed to support it? We intentionally left out >> dramatis personae and stagedir, > > as other markup could be used for the same purpose. > > > What are you proposing? > personae (sp?) is a needed wrapper? > > Nothing at http://wiki.docbook.org/topic/PublishersMinimalElements that > strikes me as clear for > <cast> > <role> > <name>Othello</ > <para> A right tart</ > </ > </ > > It is a bit 'peculiar' to a play Scott? >
> > As is stage direction, for multi para content? > > <para role='direction'> seems viable, but already overladen? > > We added <direction> as a block level element and <inlinedirection> as an inline element. We felt that these had enough additional semantic value that it was worth adding. We definitely thought that they were drama specific - they would work for screenplays as well as stage plays I think. cheers nic -- Nic Gibson Director, Corbas Consulting Editorial and Technical Consultancy http://www.corbas.co.uk/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
