Re: [docbook-tc] Fwd: Status of bug #281: allow xi:include in set

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

Bob Stayton <bobs@sagehill.net> writes:
> I just checked the latest schemas that Norm uploaded to OASIS, and
> it appears that this is indeed a bug.
>
> In all other instances of xi:include in the DB XInclude schema, the
> xi:include was part of a pattern named db.*.content or
> db.*.components, and then that pattern is used with a repeatable
> suffix in the element definition. But in set, we have:
>
> db.set.components =
>   ((db.set | db.book)+ | db.article+)
>   | db.xi.include
>
>     element set {
>       db.set.attlist,
>       db.set.info,
>       db.toc.components?,
>       db.set.components,
>       db.setindex.components?
>     }
>
> That only allows a single xi:include in place of other elements. We
> must allow more than one, and we must allow a mix of xi:include and
> elements.

Yep. We don't do that in set because we forbid mixing books and articles
in a set.

Given how relaxed we are about such things in other places, perhaps the
straightforward fix is:

 db.set.components =
   (db.set | db.book | db.article)
   | db.xi.include

     element set {
       db.set.attlist,
       db.set.info,
       db.toc.components?,
       db.set.components+,
       db.setindex.components?
     }

Alternatively, we could work a little harder:

 db.set.components =
   ((db.set | db.book | db.xi.include)+ | (db.article | db.xi.include)+)

     element set {
       db.set.attlist,
       db.set.info,
       db.toc.components?,
       db.set.components+,
       db.setindex.components?
     }

Thoughts?
                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | To think is not enough; you must
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | think of something.--Jules Renard
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature