Re: [docbook-tc] Questions about RFE 3368279

"Bob Stayton" <> writes:
> In other words, keep title and info and make the block and section
> content optional, not required.

Ok. That seems a little less violent :-)

> 2. Regarding the list of elements, I had intended to include
> hierarchical elements that are likely to be modularized, so I would
> include sect1 through sect5 and simplesect, although I doubt
> simplesect would be further modularized in practice.

Ok.

> Now that you mention it, part and partintro should be included too.

Ok.

> I had not intended to include refentry and refsection, as a refentry
> is a cleanly defined module already. It differs from topic because
> topic can be used in a structure hierachy to morph into other
> structure elements using renderas. I would include reference,
> because refentry elements are certainly modules and reference
> currently requires at least one refentry.

Ok.

> I had not intended to include non-hierarchical elements like
> procedure, blockquote, sidebar, or other titled elements. Those are
> unlikely to be modularized in a structure.

Ok.

> 3.  So I'm not proposing "Required bag of stuff" OR "empty", I'm proposing "Only title required".  8^)

Got it.

> I personally don't think it is necessary to customize this just for
> assembly. Creating a chapter with just a title and no other content
> may not be very useful, but it does not violate the rules of a
> hierarchical structure. And it can be useful in the early stages.
> When I write in DocBook, I often create my whole hierarchy with just
> titles, but I currently must add empty paras so it validates. With
> this change, I won't have to add the empty paras to get started. 8^)

Ok.
                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <>      | Life is an irritation--Tucker Case
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | (Christopher Moore)
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee |