Re: Allow <info> as root element?
David Cramer <[email protected]> Thu, 1 Dec 2022 12:38:52 -0600
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.docbook.misc |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--Apple-Mail-33FED536-4F8C-440D-81C7-EDC3ACCF5BDB
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=EF=BB=BF
On 12/1/22 12:30 AM, Thomas Schraitle wrote:
>=20
> You are right, the _DTD_ cannot define a start element and as such every r=
oot=20
> element would be possible. But you miss the point. :-)=20
>=20
> The DTD is _not_ not used for DocBook 5 (with the exception of 5.0, but th=
at's=20
> a different story). The official blessed DocBook 5 schema is written in RE=
LAX=20
> NG (RNG). In RNG you _can_ define start elements. This is what DocBook 5 d=
id.=20
> However, <info> is not part of that list.=20
>=20
> In other, more practical words: if you load a file which has <info> has ro=
ot=20
> element, such a file would be flagged as invalid in your XML editor if you=
try=20
> to validate it.
=46rom this thread, I think these two things are true:
Valid us cases exist for allowing more elements or even all elements to be r=
oot elements in the DocBook schema and the TC should consider it.
Users should be less afraid of making a DocBook variant. The sentence in TDG=
"If You Change DocBook, It=E2=80=99s Not DocBook Anymore!" sounds a little t=
hreatening. Admittedly it introduces some overhead, probably including creat=
ing an Oxygen framework that extends the stock DocBook one and distributing i=
t to your users as an addon, but it's not fundamentally different from custo=
mizing the xslts.=20
Regards,
David
=20
--Apple-Mail-33FED536-4F8C-440D-81C7-EDC3ACCF5BDB
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3D=
utf-8"></head><body dir=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"ltr">=EF=BB=BF
=20
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUTF-8"=
>
=20
=20
<div class=3D"moz-cite-prefix">On 12/1/22 12:30 AM, Thomas Schraitle
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" cite=3D"mid:d0ec1443-eb69-b362-1717-161ff23318=
[email protected]"><br>
You are right, the _DTD_ cannot define a start element and as such
every root
<br>
element would be possible. But you miss the point. :-)
<br>
<br>
The DTD is _not_ not used for DocBook 5 (with the exception of
5.0, but that's
<br>
a different story). The official blessed DocBook 5 schema is
written in RELAX
<br>
NG (RNG). In RNG you _can_ define start elements. This is what
DocBook 5 did.
<br>
However, <info> is not part of that list.
<br>
<br>
In other, more practical words: if you load a file which has
<info> has root
<br>
element, such a file would be flagged as invalid in your XML
editor if you try
<br>
to validate it.</blockquote><p style=3D"-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto=
;">=46rom this thread, I think these two things are true:</p><ol style=3D"-w=
ebkit-text-size-adjust: auto;"><li>Valid us cases exist for allowing more el=
ements or even all elements to be root elements in the DocBook schema and th=
e TC should consider it.</li><li>Users should be less afraid of making a Doc=
Book variant. The sentence in TDG "If You Change DocBook, It=E2=80=99s Not D=
ocBook Anymore!" sounds a little threatening. Admittedly it introduces some o=
verhead, probably including creating an Oxygen framework that extends the st=
ock DocBook one and distributing it to your users as an addon, but it's not f=
undamentally different from customizing the xslts. <br></li></ol><p sty=
le=3D"-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;">Regards,</p><p style=3D"-webkit-text-=
size-adjust: auto;">David</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p> <br>
</p>
=20
</div></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail-33FED536-4F8C-440D-81C7-EDC3ACCF5BDB--