I'm following up on my action item to develop markup for metadata in assemblies. As background, here are the minutes from the previous meeting: -------------------------------------------------------------- Some wanted to use info for metadata about the assembly elements themselves, following the pattern of other docbook elements where an info element documents its parent. Bob mentioned that using info in module where content is being specified was confusing, since that location implies using info as an override. Larry pointed out that the element name "override" in module was not always appropriate. In the case of a module that specifies renderas="chapter" and has no resourceref attribute, then a title specified in that module would not be overriding anything. Perhaps "contentinfo" would be more general. --------------------------------------------------------------- I believe that the <info> element name cannot be disambiguated in this situation. No matter how we document it, some people will interpret it as the opposite of what we intend. I would suggest we avoid using it in this context. So I would suggest the following: 1. For metadata about the assembly elements themselves, give them explicit element names similar to those used in DocBook 4: assemblyinfo structureinfo moduleinfo resourcesinfo descriptioninfo resourceinfo relationshipsinfo transformsinfo transforminfo relationshipinfo instanceinfo associationinfo outputinfo filterininfo filteroutinfo If the committee feels that is too many new elements, we could use assemblyinfo for all of them. 2. For content intended to be included in the output, I would suggest <merge> instead of <override>. Whatever content is in merge is intended to be merged with the resources to generate the output. Exactly how it is merged is up the local application. Bob Stayton Sagehill Enterprises
bobs@sagehill.net