[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

[docbook] Re: How to use classsynopsis and friends

[Norman Walsh]

Aristedes Maniatis  writes:
> I guess I'm just not understanding a fundamental concept in docbook
> then. I had always assumed docbook was a pure documentation schema and
> not intended to model real world concepts. When I look at

Well. Every now and then, we've been persuaded to do some modeling
in the aid of documentation. The class/method/fieldsynopsis elements
are one example, cmdsynopsis an older example, and everyone's favorite
mistake msgset.

Generally speaking, I think our forays into modeling have
been...disappointing, but that's where we are.

Be seeing you,
  norm

-- 
Norman Walsh   | No man's knowledge here can go
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | beyond his experience.--John Locke
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee |


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature