Tobias Reif wrote:
> Then how about "tagname" instead of "sgmltag" plus "xmltag"? I do not
> like marking up xml tags as if they were SGML tags.
Remind backward compatibility issues.
> http://www.docbook.org/tdg/en/html/sgmltag.html
> "A future version of DocBook will address this issue [...]
> In the meantime, you may get by by assigning a Role attribute for XML."
I think that this statement is obsoleted as new classes emptytag and
xmlpi are there for couple of years. I don't know about any other
classes needed in conjuction with XML.
There is also new namespace attribute for assigning namespace to element
or attribute marked up by sgmltag.
So do you see still any lack with sgmltag except little name
inconvenience when used for XML related markup?
Jirka
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jirka Kosek
e-mail:
http://www.kosek.cz
