Re: [docbook-apps] Profiling NOT condition

[Fekete , Róbert]

I agree, it would be great to have a NOT condition for profiling.
Another useful thing would be something like ELSE (that is, to mark some
text that appears only if none of the conditions matched).

Robert

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Thomas Schraitle  wrote:

> Hi Matteo,
>
> On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 15:36:53 +0200
> Matteo Regazzo  wrote:
>
> > [...]
> > Does the DocBook include something like a "NOT" conditionfor the
> > profiling?
>
> Unfortunately, the profiling stylesheet doesn't support a NOT condition.
> It would be very convenient to have one.
>
> What you can do is to list all possible profiling attributes except the
> one which you want to exclude (that's your "not condition").
>
> You can translate the "not condition" into this set of relationships:
>
>  not Cond2 = Cond1
>  not Cond1 = Cond2
>
> If you allow more than two values in your profiling attribute, you
> have to list *all* your possible values, except the excluded one:
>
>  not Cond1 = Cond2;Cond3;Cond4;...
>
>
> Hope this helps.
>
>
> --
> Gruß/Regards,
> Thomas Schraitle
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-apps-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-apps-h...@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>

[docbook] Re: How to use classsynopsis and friends

[Norman Walsh]

maxwell  writes:
> It's too late now, I'm sure, but as a user of DocBook for purposes
> other than software documentation (we use it for grammars), DocBook
> seems bloated with all these tags for software (the aforementioned
>  being a perfect example).

Yes. Well. Fair enough, but

  "DocBook is a schema (available in several languages including RELAX
  NG, SGML and XML DTDs, and W3C XML Schema) maintained by the DocBook
  Technical Committee of OASIS. It is particularly well suited to
  books and papers about computer hardware and software (though it is
  by no means limited to these applications)."

> In our customization, we
> remove all those tags, and add in the ones we need for literate
> programming and for linguistics, using a namespace prefix for our
> tags.

That's absolutely perfect. It's exactly what users should do with
DocBook. You're free to put your linguistic elements in the DocBook
namespace too, if you'd like. See:

http://docbook.org/tdg51/en/html/ch01.html#nsusage

and

http://docbook.org/tdg51/en/html/ch05.html#s-notdocbook

> It always seemed to me like DocBook could have had a much simpler
> model, by putting the software- and hardware-specific tags into a
> separate namespace. That would make it easier for other potential
> users to wade through the remaining elements and decide which of them
> they really need. Obviously that couldn't have happened until DB5, and
> it's probably too late now. I suppose the next best thing would be to
> compile a list of tags that are core DB (meaning about text in
> general), and/or a list of software- and hardware-specific tags, which
> would make it easier for potential users.

You could start with Simplified DocBook as a base.

Be seeing you,
  norm

-- 
Norman Walsh   | Hanging is too good for a man who
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | makes puns; he should be drawn and
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | quoted.--Fred Allen


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

[docbook] Re: How to use classsynopsis and friends

[Norman Walsh]

Stefan Seefeld  writes:
> Yes, at this point it's not possible to remove all the original synopsis
> elements, so we'll have to live with them. But if users switch to the
> API extension (if it turns out to be useful to anyone outside a small
> community, that is), these elements may indeed be forgotten as a
> historic accident.

We could, at some future "big bang" changover, DocBook 7.0 for
example, remove them. I suppose.

Be seeing you,
  norm

-- 
Norman Walsh   | Art has to move you and design
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | does not, unless it's a good
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | design for a bus.--David Hockney


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [docbook-apps] Profiling NOT condition

[Bob Stayton]

Take a look at the template with mode="profile" in 
profiling/profile-mode.xsl.  It isn't that complicated, and would be 
pretty straightforward to customize to support the logic for a NOT or 
ELSE option.


Bob Stayton
Sagehill Enterprises
b...@sagehill.net

On 10/6/2015 11:28 PM, Fekete, Róbert wrote:

I agree, it would be great to have a NOT condition for profiling.
Another useful thing would be something like ELSE (that is, to mark some
text that appears only if none of the conditions matched).

Robert

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Thomas Schraitle > wrote:

Hi Matteo,

On Tue, 6 Oct 2015 15:36:53 +0200
Matteo Regazzo > wrote:

 > [...]
> Does the DocBook include something like a "NOT" conditionfor the
> profiling?

Unfortunately, the profiling stylesheet doesn't support a NOT condition.
It would be very convenient to have one.

What you can do is to list all possible profiling attributes except the
one which you want to exclude (that's your "not condition").

You can translate the "not condition" into this set of relationships:

  not Cond2 = Cond1
  not Cond1 = Cond2

If you allow more than two values in your profiling attribute, you
have to list *all* your possible values, except the excluded one:

  not Cond1 = Cond2;Cond3;Cond4;...


Hope this helps.


--
Gruß/Regards,
 Thomas Schraitle

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
docbook-apps-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org

For additional commands, e-mail:
docbook-apps-h...@lists.oasis-open.org





-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-apps-unsubscr...@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-apps-h...@lists.oasis-open.org

RE: [docbook] How to use classsynopsis and friends

[Cavicchio, Rob]

Stefan Seefeld [mailto:ste...@seefeld.name] wrote:

> Yes, at this point it's not possible to remove all the original synopsis
> elements, so we'll have to live with them. But if users switch to the
> API extension (if it turns out to be useful to anyone outside a small
> community, that is), these elements may indeed be forgotten as a
> historic accident.


Why not possible? 4.x to 5.x introduced breaking changes, right? Seems to me 
that if it makes sense to clean it up, then it's a reasonable goal for 6.x.

I, too, use only , not any of its variations.


*
Rob Cavicchio
rob.cavicc...@emc.com

Principal Information Architect
EMC Corporation

The opinions expressed here are my personal opinions. Content published here is 
not read or approved in advance by EMC and does not necessarily reflect the 
views and opinions of EMC.