I'm not sure which side of this discussion I come down on.
I think Nancy makes a valid point, but I also think that
technical documentation can reasonably refer to a variety
of different kinds of people besides authors and editors
and in contexts other than credits.
That said, I tend to agree with Scott that this isn't worth
making a big deal over. I'd be inclined to accept the mild
tag abuse or to add person as a local customization.
Another 2 cents:)
Dick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Hudson [mailto:]
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 9:56 AM
> To: Nancy_P_Harrison/Lexington/IBM
> Cc: Dick Hamilton;
> Subject: Re: [docbook-tc] personblurb in address?
>
>
> Hi Nancy,
>
> I looked at othercredit as well, but the enumerations of the class
> attribute make more difficult to generalize and I'd rather
> not use role
> unless absolutely necessary.
>
> The author and editor tags are very specific, while person is
> much more
> general. Perhaps an employee directory would be better
> handled with the
> vCard standard, but since all of my client's other docs will be
> standardizing on DocBook, it would be nice to use familiar
> tag sets and
> structures.
>
> This may, indeed, be out of scope. However, I would also like to see
> this element added to provide additional flexibility for DocBook. The
> periodical RFE was narrowing the scope of use, not adding
> generalization/flexibility.
>
> I'm not going to die on the sword for this one, as othercredit could
> indeed be made to work, but I'm also afraid that the use I described
> would actually be abusing the tag a bit. It also feels a
> little kludgy.
>
> Best regards,
>
> --Scott
>
> Nancy P Harrison wrote:
> >
> > At the risk of roiling the waters...
> >
> > While I agree that the best way to make Scott's task easier
> is to have
> > all the info in a 'person'-type element, rather than in the address
> > element, I'm not sure how adding a person element fulfills
> our mission
> > of supporting the delivery of technical documentation. At
> the meeting
> > yesterday, we specifically rejected an RFE for being
> out-of-scope, and
> > this request seems equally out-of-scope to me. If a
> company really
> > wants to create an employee directory in DocBook, they already can,
> > using [and maybe aliasing?] the 'othercredit' element,
> which matches
> > author and editor in content.
> >
> > But I don't see how generic 'person' content is applicable to
> > technical documentation. If we add person, we should also take
> > another look at the RFE we rejected yesterday
> >
> > just my $.02
> >
> > Nancy
> >
> >
> > "Dick Hamilton" <> wrote on 03/15/2006
> 08:58:40 PM:
> >
> > > I agree that it's a bit strange to have either authorblurb or
> > > personblurb in address. I wonder why authorblurb ever ended
> > > up there in the first place.
> > >
> > > I'd be more comfortable generalizing the higher level structure
> > > (author, editor) to something like <person> and use an attribute
> > > to identify the kind of person (author, editor, DocBook Geek).
> > > Or add <person> with the same content model, which might be better
> > > since author and editor are pretty deeply ingrained and (at least
> > > author) probably used in nearly every document.
> > >
> > > Either option would make it possible to fully identify all sorts
> > > of people and not add extra stuff to their addresses.
> > >
> > > Dick
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Scott Hudson [mailto:]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 11:39 AM
> > > > To: Norman Walsh
> > > > Cc:
> > > > Subject: Re: [docbook-tc] personblurb in address?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Here's my situation, IHAC that is standardizing on DocBook
> > > > 4.5 and has a
> > > > variety of publications. Most are very straightforward, but
> > > > they would
> > > > also like to publish their Employee Directory using DocBook.
> > > > That means
> > > > for each entry, there will be a name, address, phone,
> email, etc.
> > > >
> > > > They would also like to put in a biography and/or job
> > > > description. This
> > > > is where I thought personblurb would make the most sense, so the
> > > > directory would look something like:
> > > > <book>
> > > > <title>Employee Directory</title>
> > > > <chapter>
> > > > <title>Communications Division</title>
> > > > <address>
> > > > <personname>
> > > > <firstname>Scott</firstname><surname>Hudson</surname>
> > > > </personname>
> > > > <affiliation>
> > > > <orgname>Flatirons Solutions</orgname>
> > > > <orgdiv>Communications</orgdiv>
> > > > </affiliation>
> > > > <email></email>
> > > > <phone>303-542-2146</phone>
> > > > <fax>303-544-0522</fax>
> > > > <street>4747 Table Mesa Drive, Suite 200</street>
> > > > <city>Boulder</city> <state>CO</state>
> <postcode>80305</postcode>
> > > > <authorblurb><para>Scott likes DocBook. He's a
> > > > certifiable DocBook
> > > > geek, and a member of the OASIS TC.</para></authorblurb>
> > > > </address>
> > > > </chapter>
> > > > </book>
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > --Scott
> > > >
> > > > P.S., Plaxo is just a service I use. I got tired of
> maintining my
> > > > addressbook in multiple places, and it syncs to Outlook and
> > > > Thunderbird.
> > > >
> > > > Norman Walsh wrote:
> > > > > / Scott Hudson <> was
> > > > heard to say:
> > > > > | according to http://docbook.org/tdg/en/html/address.html,
> > > > authorblurb
> > > > > | is allowed in address. Why is personblurb not also
> allowed (if the
> > > > > | address is describing someone, say in an employee
> > > > directory, rather
> > > > > | than an author)?
> > > > >
> > > > > | Perhaps personblurb should be part of person.ident.mix?
> > > > >
> > > > > Both seem a little bizarre to me. Why is the blurb part of
> > > > the address?
> > > > > Note that in 5.0, neither is allowed.
> > > > >
> > > > > http://docbook.org/tdg5/en/html/address.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Allowing biblioref looks a bit odd in there but it's a
> > > > consequence of
> > > > > allowing link and xref. I'm not sure what I think about that.
> > > > >
> > > > > | /Add me to your address book.../
> > > > > |
> > > >
> <https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=17180023598&v0=298305&k0=537541243>
> > > > >
> > > > > Is plaxo a service that you're using personally, or
> something that
> > > > > Flatiron uses? (Just curious.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Be seeing you,
> > > > > norm
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Flatirons Solutions
> > > > /*Vision. Experience. Engineering Excellence.*/
> > > > <http://www.flatironssolutions.com>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *Scott Hudson*
> > > > /Senior Consultant/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > *Flatirons Solutions*
> > > > 4747 Table Mesa Drive Suite 200
> > > > Boulder, CO 80305
> > > > <http://maps.yahoo.com/py/maps.py?Pyt=Tmap&addr=4747+Table+Mes
> > > a+Drive+Suite+200&csz=Boulder%2C+CO+80305&country=us>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > <mailto:>
> > > web:http://flatironssolutions.com
> <http://www.flatironssolutions.com>
> > > blog:http://scottysengineeringlog.net
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > tel:
> > > fax:
> > > mobile:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 303-542-2146
> > > 303-272-7069
> > > 303-332-1883
> > >
> >
> > ____
> > Nancy Harrison
> > IBM Rational Software
> > Phone: 781-676-2535
> >
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> Flatirons Solutions
> /*Vision. Experience. Engineering Excellence.*/
> <http://www.flatironssolutions.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Scott Hudson*
> /Senior Consultant/
>
>
>
> *Flatirons Solutions*
> 4747 Table Mesa Drive Suite 200
> Boulder, CO 80305
> <http://maps.yahoo.com/py/maps.py?Pyt=Tmap&addr=4747+Table+Mes
a+Drive+Suite+200&csz=Boulder%2C+CO+80305&country=us>
<mailto:>
web:http://flatironssolutions.com <http://www.flatironssolutions.com>
blog:http://scottysengineeringlog.net
tel:
fax:
mobile:
303-542-2146
303-272-7069
303-332-1883
/Add me to your address book.../
<https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=17180023598&v0=298305&k0=537541243>
/Want a signature like this?/ <http://www.plaxo.com/signature>
