Re: FYI - element ignore/unignore feature request
[email protected] (Jeffery B. Rancier) Tue, 24 Jun 2003 11:04:35 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.emacs.psgml.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Michael Smith <[email protected]> writes: Is PSGML mode currently being maintained? > This is just an FYI regarding a PSGML feature request I filed a few days > back. Just wondering whether others might think it'd be a useful feature. > > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=757878&group_id=9156&atid=359156 > > In a nutshell, the request is to provide a means for the PSGML interface > to 'ignore' certain valid elements even when editing against a particular DTD. > > This would amount to supressing elements from the Markup>Insert Element > menu and from the sgml-insert-element (C-c C-e) set of completions. > > Rationale... > > The sole rationale behind this enhancement would be to reduce the number > and kinds elements that authors need to choose from when editing against > large DTDs (such as TEI and DocBook). > > Without such a mechanism, doc authors and authoring groups need to do > DTD customization to eliminate the elements they don't have any use for. > > But it seems like it would be much more efficient and easily > user-customizable to meet this reduce-the-set-of-elements-I-see > requirement by providing an 'ignore' capability at the editing > application layer level instead of at the DTD level. > > Background... > > There has been much talk in the DocBook community recently about > modularizing the DocBook DTD/schema into logical sets of elements. I > could be wrong, but as far as I can see, the main value that most people > suggesting that seem to have in mind is to make DocBook authoring easier > by giving authors and authoring groups the capability to omit sets of > elements for which they have no use. > > I could see making changes at the DTD/schema level if the requirement > were driven by concerns about validating or processing documents, not > just authoring concerns. But that doesn't seem to be the case. > > So this proposed 'ignore' mechanism would provide a simple way just to > solve the ease-of-authoring need. > > --Mike -- Thanks, Jeff ,---- | Jeffery B. Rancier | | Softechnics | a METTLER TOLEDO company `---- ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: INetU Attention Web Developers & Consultants: Become An INetU Hosting Partner. Refer Dedicated Servers. We Manage Them. You Get 10% Monthly Commission! INetU Dedicated Managed Hosting http://www.inetu.net/partner/index.php