Re: DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Agenda: 16 July 2008

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

/ "Bob Stayton" <bobs@sagehill.net> was heard to say:
|  b. Norm to review Committee Spec comments so far.

We only received one official comment, AFIACT, Michiel Kamermans comment
about internationalization:

  http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook-comment/200805/msg00000.html

The minutes are not entirely clear, but I believe the TC position is
that the W3C ITS WG has solved this problem and we will distributed
their I18N'd version of the DocBook schema.

|  c. Norm to resond to poster of Ruby request regarding W3C ITS.

Done.

|  h. Norm to review his understanding of 1912756 Add @scope to index.

Looking at the values of scope on indexterm, in response to a comment or
message I can no longer find, I convinced myself that it would be useful
for an index to specify it's associated scope.

I'm no longer convinced.

First, this only comes into play when a set of box is being indexed
and the author wants one book to have a local index that is not a
subset of the global index. By marking some indexterms as "local" they
can be excluded from the set index.

So a setindex, collects up "all" and "global" terms. The index in the
back of each individual volume just collects the local terms.

I think the combination of index and setindex is entirely sufficient.
I withdraw this RFE.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | It is seldom that any liberty is
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | lost all at once.--David Hume
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee |

PGP signature