Hi,
has a decision been taken about that point? I've seen no RFE in
sourceforge list.
That's something I really need.
Camille.
Norman Walsh wrote:
> / Peter Eisentraut <> was heard to say:
> | Norman Walsh writes:
> |
> |> The DocBook TC has had several discussions about additional places in
> |> DocBook where it would be beneficial to allow metainfo. Our current
> |> candidate list of places is:
> |>
> |> equation, example, figure, informalequation, informalexample,
> |> informalfigure, informaltable, itemizedlist, legalnoticeinfo, msgset,
> |> orderedlist, procedure, qandadiv, qandaentry, qandaset, table,
> |> variablelist
> |
> | I tend to think that every block-level element could have meta info. For
> | instance, even footnotes and paras could have separate authors or legal
> | status. It's unlikely to be used often, but not more unlikely than, say,
> | a procedure with its own metainfo. And if you allow meta info in every
> | block element it would also make the whole thing more consistent and
> | easier to learn and use.
>
> Adding info to every block element, would have two drawbacks:
>
> - It'd make all the content models that much larger which would complicate
> processing expectations
>
> - In mixed content elements, it would not be possible to say something
> like this:
>
> <!ELEMENT para (docinfo?,(#PCDATA|emphasis|...)*)>
>
> you'd have to allow docinfo anywhere inside the paragraph:
>
> <para>Hi there<docinfo><title>Some Title</title></docinfo>. Isn't this
> a strange<docinfo><isbn>34234342</isbn></docinfo> paragraph?</para>
>
> Be seeing you,
> norm
>
>
