Re: [docbook-tc] Assembly questions

"Rowland, Larry" <> writes:
> I just pulled a copy of the DocBook source tree from sourceforge to try and
> work out an example that demonstrates the type attribute and I noticed we
> seem to have lost the description attribute on the resource and resources 
> elements.  Not sure if it was intentional or just got lost in transcription, 
> so wanted to check and see.  It was text in both cases, intended to replace
> comments in the file describing what resources were for with something
> easy to parse for doing things like generating manifests.

Yes, I may have dropped them on the floor. Attributes are
inappropriate for human-readable prose: they're not I18N friendly in
terms of glyphs (for non-Unicode characters) and can't contain the
nested markup that is sometimes necessary.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <>      | To create a little flower is the
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | labour of ages.-- Blake
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee |