Re: [docbook-tc] relatedlink element?

"Bob Stayton" <> writes:
> I've reviewed all the minutes and the mail archive, and it appears
> that relatedlink was never approved. It came up in 2010 during the
> development of the topic and assembly elements. The TC minutes discuss
> adding it as an inline element, and there was a discussion of
> reltables which we developed samples for but found too complicated and
> postponed until after 5.1 Then we got into discussing the
> relationships element in assembly, and there was no more mention of
> relatedlink. Did we decide to not pursue relatedlink, or did we simply
> forget about it?

I'm afraid I don't recall. Larry, in your mind, does relatedlink
fulfill a role that we're missing?

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <>      | Everything has been said before,
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | but since nobody every listens we
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | have to keep going back and
                                   | beginning all over again.--André
                                   | Gide