> <meta name="products"> > <meta name="HA" content="10SP1,10SP2,10SP3" > >My HA product</meta>
You can’t do that in any case. You get either the content attribute or
you get element content, not both.
> <meta name="products">
> <meta name="abcd" content="10SP1,10SP2,10SP3">
> <meta name="short" content="ABCD"/>
> <meta name="long" content="The ABCD long product name"/>
> </meta>
> </meta>
You could, subject to the things you can’t do :-), but as you observed,
I think you could also justify having
<meta name="products">
<productnumber>10SP1,10SP2,10SP3</productnumber>
<productname>The ABCD long product name</productname>
<abbrev>ABCD</abbrev>
</meta>
You have complete freedom inside the meta element; you could even invent
your own markup. Meta inside meta would (to me, at least) suggest that
it was meta *of* the meta, not a further constraint on the value of the
meta.
> Another issue could arise, if someone customizes DocBook (as we do). The
> customization layer could potentially remove productname or any other inline
> element. This would seriously limit the selection. Allowing nested <meta>s
> would reduce this risk.
You can remove them from context where you don’t want them and leave
them in meta.
Be seeing you,
norm
--
Norman Tovey-Walsh <[email protected]>
https://nwalsh.com/
> The people I distrust most are those who want to improve our lives but
> have only one course of action.--Frank Herbert
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
