This comes under best practices, since no changes are necessary to the schema or the transforms. It would probably be a good idea to add an example of this under termdef in the definitive guide and reference it from both acronym and abbrev.
This does, however, place the burden on the author to make sure that any expansion of the term provided in the glossary is consistent with that provided in the body of the document. I would likely use an entity for the contents of the glossterm and the termdef in a 4.x document based on DTDs. It becomes slightly more challenging in 5.0 unless the transclusion proposal being discussed is implemented (adding a DTD just to get entities seems like a kludge to me). Regards, Larry Rowland -----Original Message----- From: Dave Pawson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2011 12:43 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [docbook] Acronym Expansion (was RE: [docbook-tc] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 15 December 2010) On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 20:31:44 +0000 "Rowland, Larry" <[email protected]> wrote: > <para>We use modulated <termdef>Light Amplification through > Stimulated Emission of Radiation (<acronym>LASER</acronym>)</termdef> > technology for short-haul data links.</para> > > If you prefer the acronym first, it still works. You can also move > the acronym outside the termdef, but this keeps them together. This > solution requires no changes to stylesheets or improvements in screen > reader technology. +1 on the solution, propose that the acronym come first and that both are in the termdef markup. -- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
