Re: Allow <info> as root element?

I=E2=80=99ve run into the same thing. I have a separate file for our =
book info, so that I can move the copyright page to the back of the book =
for ebooks.

I am lazy, however, and just ignore the errors when I=E2=80=99m editing =
the info page:-). I essentially do what Norm mentioned; that is, only =
pay attention to validation when the block is included in a book.

The other thing you could do, if you=E2=80=99re using xinclude, is to =
put the info block into a valid root element, so you can validate it, =
then use xinclude to include just the info element when you build a =
deliverable.

I=E2=80=99m not sure how doable that is with assemblies.

Dick Hamilton
-------
XML Press
XML for Technical Communicators
http://xmlpress.net
[email protected]



> On Nov 29, 2022, at 14:03, Thomas Schraitle <[email protected]> wrote:
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> On 28.11.22 11:10, Norm Tovey-Walsh wrote:
>>> currently, DocBook v5.2 (and previous versions) allows several =
elements as root
>>> element. However, it is currently not possible to use info "alone". =
Any reasons
>>> why?
>>=20
>> I can see how reusing metadata might make sense in some environments. =
I
>> won=E2=80=99t speak for anyone else on the TC, but I tend to think of =
it as
>> being attached to something. It provides metadata for an element, and =
so
>> it=E2=80=99s not immediately obvious what it means sitting on its =
own.
>>=20
>> It isn=E2=80=99t that I thought there was any reason to forbid it so =
much as it
>> never occurred to me that it would be useful.
>=20
> I know, this use case may be not very common. Still I think, if you =
use
> assemblies and share content it might become more helpful, especially =
when you
> want (or need to) validate on its own.
>=20
>=20
>>> Imagine you would like to share some common meta information among =
several
>>> articles:
>>=20
>> There=E2=80=99s obviously nothing that prevents you from doing this. =
You can
>> XInclude this metadata file into several articles and then validate
>> them.
>>=20
>> It would be a very simple Relax-NG customization to allow info in the
>> =E2=80=9Cstart=E2=80=9D pattern then it could be validated =
independently.
>=20
> That's true, but that wouldn't be DocBook anymore. ;) Thus validating =
wouldn't
> work.
>=20
>=20
> --
> Gru=C3=9F/Regards
>  Thomas Schraitle
>=20
>=20
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>=20