I lean toward 1; I think it is more consistent with other areas. I
always prefer enumerated types for authors but frequently find the
escape-hatch useful. Less desirable, but acceptable would be 2. I
agree with you that the third options is much less desirable.
Larry Rowland
On Thu, 2006-04-06 at 08:05 -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:
> Hello world,
>
> In DocBook V4.x (and prior versions), the refmiscinfo element has
> a CDATA class attribute. That's inconsistent with the general
> principle in DocBook that class attributes have enumerated values.
> In DocBook V5.0, there are three possibilities:
>
> 1. Convert class to an enumerated list (with the other/otherclass
> escape hatch)
>
> 2. Rename the attribute 'type' (that's consistent with existing
> conventions)
>
> 3. Leave it CDATA and don't rename it
>
> For the record, I prefer either of 1 or 2 over 3. Strongly.
>
> In 5.0b4, I implemented option 2. But at the last TC telcon, we
> wondered if, in fact, the number of values that people actually use
> was small enough to justify the class/otherclass mechanism. In a
> sense, this would aid in interoperability and authoring since it would
> provide a list of choices instead of requiring authors and tools to
> know about arbitrary values. OTOH, if there are hundreds of values
> already in use, making an enormous enumerated list seems less useful.
>
> So:
>
> If you use refmiscinfo, and if you've used the class attribute, what
> values have you put in it? For reference, out of the box, the XSL
> stylesheets currently only recognize 'source', 'version', and
> 'manual'.
>
> And do you have a preference for class/otherclass or type?
>
> Be seeing you,
> norm
>
