(slightly off-topic as far as XXE goes - please let me know if there's somewhere else more appropriate for discussions such as this)
As I start to use Docbook in anger, there are a couple of things that I miss in the spec that I've had to add myself, including two seemingly generic ones: - Directory Tree Representations We often want to include example directory trees in our documentation. I've added the obvious tags (directory, disk, file) that can nest in the obvious way and include 'name' and 'description' tags. I've modified the Docbook XSL stylesheets to produce, (IMVHO) stunningly beautiful PDFs. :-) http://geraintnorth.com/docbook_directories.pdf This seems too generic and useful to waste - how much hassle is it likely to be for me to try and get these rolled into docbook? - A profiling container for a set of para elements. Our product ships in a number of different platforms, and thus our (mostly common) documentation uses profiling (with the arch attribute) so that we can build each variant as required. Often, whole sections are different (e.g. installation instructions vary between Linux and Solaris versions of our product). Now, we can't do this: <section xml:id="Installation" arch = "Linux"> <title>Installation</title> <para>...</para> <para>...</para> <para>...</para> </section> <section xml:id="Installation" arch = "Solaris"> <title>Installation</title> <para>...</para> <para>...</para> <para>...</para> </section> ...because you can't have two elements with the same xml:id, but we need the xml:id to be consistent so that our cross-references work cleanly. What I want to do is this: <section xml:id="Installation"> <title>Installation</title> <contentgroup arch = "Linux"> <para>...</para> <para>...</para> <para>...</para> </contentgroup> <contentgroup arch = "Solaris"> <para>...</para> <para>...</para> <para>...</para> </contentgroup> </section> But as far as I can see, there is no <contentgroup> equivalent, so it looks like we'll have to do this: <section xml:id="Installation"> <title>Installation</title> <para arch = "Linux">...</para> <para arch = "Linux">...</para> <para arch = "Linux">...</para> <para arch = "Solaris">...</para> <para arch = "Solaris">...</para> <para arch = "Solaris">...</para> </section> Which is cumbersome and likely to be bug-prone over time. Am I missing anything in the docbook spec, or is there really nothing that fulfils the requirements of my contentgroup? How do other people work around this? Thanks, Geraint North Principal Engineer Transitive
