Norman Walsh wrote:
> Here's the spec. I have the impression that not everyone has read it,
> or perhaps even knew it existed. I'll delay posting 4.3 for a few more
> days until I see if there are any comments.
I found one typo on two places. In the abstract and in the 3rd para of
1st section (Introduction): maintainance -> mainteinance
I have also one editorial note. There are two list of references --
informal between appendixes B and C and normative at the end of
document. I think that more logical would be having both bibliographies
at the end or having the informal one as a part of appendix A which is
citing these entries.
> In particular, we should probably have discussed the MIME type
> appendix.
Paul already mentioned xslt+xml typo.
Do we already asked IANA (http://www.iana.org/cgi-bin/mediatypes.pl) for
registering this new media type? We probably should postpone releasing
spec until IANA will confirm our registration for the case they will not
allow us use application/docbook+xml (which is very improbable, of course).
And final note. Section "Changes Proposed for DocBook V5.0" doesn't
mention that V5.0 will be primary based on RNG. Wouldn't be fair to add
at least one sentence saying something like:
"XML validation technologies rapidly evolved in the last years and DTD
is no longer the best technical way to express DocBook document type
grammar. TC decided to base DocBook V5.0 on Relax NG. TC will continue
to provide DTD variant of DocBook V5.0 schema but this DTD may use
different parametric entity organization then DocBook V4.3 DTD. This may
affect existing DocBook DTD customizations. Move to Relax NG can also
cause some one time backward-incompatible changes which are not yet
listed here."
OK, more then one sentence, but from user point of view I like to be
informed well in advance.
Jirka
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jirka Kosek
e-mail:
http://www.kosek.cz
