[docbook-apps] Paragraph content model
/ Dave Pawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say: | I wonder what the original reason was, unless it was M$ type of pressure | to have everything everywhere. See http://docbook.org/tdg5/en/html/para.html :-) But more helpfully, consider the following example: There are times when it may be necessary to frob the foobar. These can be summarized as follows: some table goes here where anything that falls outside the boundaries of column 1 must be considered an error. Logically, that's a single paragraph with a table in the middle. To mark that up as two paragraphs with a table in between fails to capture what the author intended. Years of struggling with HTML has mostly trained me not to write that way, or not to worry about the mangled markup that results from making that three sibling elements, but it's still a rational markup model. | I'm tempted to put an RFE in at sourceforge. I suspect you'll be disapointed. BTW, did you ever follow-up on the RFE that you did submit about change markup? I did reply to it. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED] | How can there be laughter, how can http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | there be pleasure, when the world Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | is burning?--The Dhammapada | (probably 3rd century BC) pgpZHwQmo969k.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [docbook-apps] Paragraph content model
Norman Walsh wrote: / Dave Pawson [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say: | I wonder what the original reason was, unless it was M$ type of pressure | to have everything everywhere. See http://docbook.org/tdg5/en/html/para.html :-) But more helpfully, consider the following example: There are times when it may be necessary to frob the foobar. These can be summarized as follows: some table goes here where anything that falls outside the boundaries of column 1 must be considered an error. Logically, that's a single paragraph with a table in the middle. To mark that up as two paragraphs with a table in between fails to capture what the author intended. Years of struggling with HTML has mostly trained me not to write that way, or not to worry about the mangled markup that results from making that three sibling elements, but it's still a rational markup model. I'm probably being 'too strict' /picky, but two paragraphs and a table seems right to me (and is what I'd do). Just an observation. If the current simpara content had been in para and a new 'messy' / complex model presented (complexpara for want of a better name) then I'd have ignored complexpara and used the para. That would allow both options and let the simpler model be used too. [Or I could start using docbook-- with the content model of simpara substituted for para] OK Norm, I'll let this one go. regards 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]
