On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Aditya Mahajan adit...@umich.edu wrote:
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:
Bruce,
very briefly: I'm very very short on time this week, so won't be able to
look into this until middle of next week, but I just wanted to let you know
that I find your
Hans Hagen pragma at wxs.nl writes:
...
in which case it keeps the input in xml and converts to other formats
(coule be tex in the case of rendering print).
As Hans says, if you're interesting in integrating XML and RDF in source
documents, you need to think of ConTeXt as a lower-level
John Haltiwanger john.haltiwanger at gmail.com writes:
[...]
Markdown with RDFa on the side will suit quite nicely, thanks to pandoc.
Actually, you can embed the RDFa within the markdown files if you like.
div property=x:section
# Introduction
Test.
/div
Pandoc will just pass it on to
Taco Hoekwater taco at elvenkind.com writes:
The new structure and referencing code is totally different from
the old code and I understand less than half of it. What's worse:
I seem to be really bad at explaining to Hans all the things that
should happen wrt. references in the bib module.
Taco Hoekwater taco at elvenkind.com writes:
Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
Wolfgang Schuster schuster.wolfgang at googlemail.com writes:
Am 31.03.2009 um 09:27 schrieb Taco Hoekwater:
Will this new module also provide BibX support?
Perhaps ;)
On the input side, the new module will load
Wolfgang Schuster schuster.wolfgang at googlemail.com writes:
Am 31.03.2009 um 09:27 schrieb Taco Hoekwater:
Will this new module also provide BibX support?
Perhaps ;)
On the input side, the new module will load bibliographies from disk
into an internal XML structure and then use
Wolfgang Schuster schuster.wolfgang at googlemail.com writes:
Am 23.03.2009 um 22:51 schrieb Mohamed Bana:
I personally would like see a professionally done typescript for
Minion and Warnock Pro with Myriad and Cronos Pro. I posted mine a
while ago, but I got no feed back.
Taco Hoekwater taco at elvenkind.com writes:
Hi,
Andreas Wagner wrote:
Just out of curiosity: What are your reasons for preferring this over TEI:
MODS was a logical choice mostly my background (scientific publishers
= MARC databases = MODS), and that BruceD'Arcus liked it. Btw,
his
Hi Hans,
Hans Hagen pragma at wxs.nl writes:
I wonder, is there any interest in the following:
- support for http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/ as basic bibl format
I think Ulf's conclusions are right. MODS is expressive, which is why I was
originally attracted to it, but it's also more
Taco Hoekwater taco at elvenkind.com writes:
[.. snip ...]
The next major release of the module (but don't expect a release
anywhere this year) will indeed support MODS through citeproc:
http://xbiblio.sourceforge.net/citeproc/
As the author of citeproc (hi Taco!), let me just update
On Dec 15, 2004, at 12:16 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:
that was from the time that i played with schema's, nowadays i prefer
relax ng
Indeed!
It may be worth noting that the next generation versions of both
DocBook and TEI:
- are developed in RELAX NG
- are namespaced
- are designed for
On Dec 13, 2004, at 1:02 PM, Adam Lindsay wrote:
What I propose is clearly a debatable XML-design issue, but it seemed
strange that fx:definelayout and fx:p were put into the same namespace.
Why do the formatting definitions share the same (theoretical) schema
as
markup? Your documents keep these
someone (not sure who) said:
I know XML source should work, but at least for me, creating XML source
is unproductive. I work with a text editor and find writing this:
``Hello world,'' says HAL.
much more productive than writing this:
p#8220;Hello world#8221;/p, says HAL.
Maybe I'm
13 matches
Mail list logo
