XHTML or CALS tables?
Apologies for cross-posting. I'm aware that this is a question that deserves ridicule, along the question 'Should I use attributes or elements to store data?' (according to the NOT the comp.text.sgml FAQ: 'Of course. What else would you use?'). Anyway, here we go: Should I use the XHTML or CALS table model for structured documents and XML storage format? I'm looking for gut reaction replies. Considerate pondering, evaluating all pertinent factors, does not seem to resolve into definite and convincing answers. Why of course, FrameMaker is part of the equation. kind regards Peter Ring ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: XHTML or CALS tables?
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 22:24:11 +0100, Peter Ring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Should I use the XHTML or CALS table model for structured documents and XML storage format? I'd lean toward CALS. It's the one supported in DITA, which is the most buzzword-compliant XML format out there at present. ;-) CALS is also the preferred choice in DocBook, the most mature of the common XML formats, although DocBook has added support for the HTML table model too. In Mif2Go's DocBook output from Frame, you can select either one; we have customers using both. HTH! -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.omsys.com/ ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
XHTML or CALS tables?
Apologies for cross-posting. I'm aware that this is a question that deserves ridicule, along the question 'Should I use attributes or elements to store data?' (according to the NOT the comp.text.sgml FAQ: 'Of course. What else would you use?'). Anyway, here we go: Should I use the XHTML or CALS table model for structured documents and XML storage format? I'm looking for gut reaction replies. Considerate pondering, evaluating all pertinent factors, does not seem to resolve into definite and convincing answers. Why of course, FrameMaker is part of the equation. kind regards Peter Ring
XHTML or CALS tables?
On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 22:24:11 +0100, Peter Ring wrote: >Should I use the XHTML or CALS table model for structured documents >and XML storage format? I'd lean toward CALS. It's the one supported in DITA, which is the most buzzword-compliant XML format out there at present. ;-) CALS is also the preferred choice in DocBook, the most mature of the common XML formats, although DocBook has added support for the HTML table model too. In Mif2Go's DocBook output from Frame, you can select either one; we have customers using both. HTH! -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc. http://www.omsys.com/
