Hi, thanks to all for the input!
On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 20:31:37 -0700 Bob Stayton <[email protected]> wrote: > [...] > > In the case of admonitions, the original DocBook authors chose to use > separate elements for the different types, instead of a single > element with an enumerated attribute. It is too late now to switch. I agree, switching to enumerated values would be too late. > I generally suggest adding @role to one of the existing elements, or > extend the schema. Although @role would be probably one solution, in that case I favor to extend the schema. I propose to allow <danger> for the following reasons: * There is a need * Matches well with ANSI Z535 standard * It's consistent with the other admonition elements * Aligns well with DITA if someone has to transform documents back and forth * From a language perspective, <danger> expresses a higher risk of injury and/or death than <caution> (or any other admonition elements). (Maybe not useful for software documentation, but DocBook can also be used in other industries where this is very much needed.) Does it make sense to open an RFE? That way the committee can discuss this in one of the next meetings? -- Gruß/Regards, Thomas Schraitle --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
