Regards,
Yas
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Antonov [mailto:]=20
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 10:33 AM
To: DITA TC list
Subject: RE: [dita] Recommendations for "page break" requests?
On Fri, 2004-09-17 at 21:02, Don Day wrote:
> I'm not finding great possibilities in my searches either. Unicode=20
> provides a set of characters that are directives for formatters, but I
> REALLY don't want writers to learn about that Pandora's box. PIs would
> be much easier to detect and handle in processing, particularly since=20
> they provide an opportunity for conditional use, which a codepoint=20
> does not. Oh, I'm not convinced yet, just working up the nerve to=20
> accept the idea.
Are you sure you want to use PI's?=20
- they cannot be validated by Schema or DTD (during the authoring
process, too)
- if you want to tweak processing of some element, what you do? Insert
PI before, after, or inside? Processing attribute in such case is much
more intuitive, at least with XSLT
- using attribute or element is easier from the authoring perspective:
you can define element specialization and enumeration for the value of
such attribute.
So let us at least consider alternative approach: having special
attribute and/or element, with no well-defined semantics, which should
be ignored by default.=20
Regards,
-- Paul =20
