Re: [docbook-tc] assembly info proposal

FWIW, I prefer <info> as well for consistency. I don't care if we use
<merge> or <override> as the parent, but I also don't want to create a bunch
of unique assemblyinfo elements.

Best regards,

--Scott


On 1/18/12 10:46 AM, "Norman Walsh" <> wrote:

> "Bob Stayton" <> writes:
>> 2. For content intended to be included in the output, I would suggest
>> <merge> instead of <override>. Whatever content is in merge is
>> intended to be merged with the resources to generate the output.
>> Exactly how it is merged is up the local application.
> 
> I'm happy with <merge> instead of <override>, but I still have a
> preference for <info> as the wrapper for metadata about the element in
> which it appears. That's what it means *everywhere else*. Yes, some
> authors will get it wrong sometimes. And they won't get the results
> they expect and they'll fix it.
> 
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm