OASIS DocBook TC2

 View Only
  • 1.  assembly metadata container

    Posted 02-22-2010 17:26
    I'm following up on my action item from the last DocBook TC. We agreed that 


  • 2.  Re: [docbook-tc] assembly metadata container

    Posted 02-22-2010 17:47
    I think I like the info-merge suggestion. I don't like info-override, 
    and I think info-resource might get confusing.
    
    We could call it infomerge or infoMerge too, if that's the style. I 
    don't have major heartburn with hyphens in element names.  I think I 
    prefer camel-case, but we haven't used that traditionally either...
    
    --Scott
    
    On 22-Feb-10 10:25 AM, Bob Stayton wrote:
    > I'm following up on my action item from the last DocBook TC. We agreed that


  • 3.  RE: [docbook-tc] assembly metadata container

    Posted 02-22-2010 23:29
    I would prefer to avoid another namespace, since I think of this as being 
    an integral part of the assembly model, and I think of namespaces as being 
    used to combine other things with DocBook.  Adding a class or type attribute 
    would be preferable to a namespace (possibly "supplemental" -- the reasoning 
    is provided below) but I think a different element is a better solution.
    
    I think "override" is not really accurate, since it implies that this element 
    overrides the info element that is contained in the original resource and it 
    may actually provide additional information.  Similarly, I think that "merge" 
    may not be a more appropriate modifier.  When I looked it up, the definition 
    was "To combine or unite" and that is not quite what I think is happening.  
    However, it seemed to be going in the right direction.  After exploring 
    synonyms for a bit, I found "supplement" with the following definitions:
    
         1. Something added to complete a thing, make up for a
            deficiency, or extend or strengthen the whole. 
         2. A section added to a book or document to give further
            information or to correct errors. 
    
    which seems to be what we are actually doing, that is we are either 
    correcting (when we provide an alternative to the title in the resource being
    referenced) or providing additional information (like a titleabbrev for use 
    in a help system).  What about infosupplement (or infosupp, although we are
    not the longest element in DocBook with infosupplement).  I am dropping the 
    dash in the name, since as you point out, there are no other instances of 
    hyphenated names where things are combined for elements like programlisting 
    or inlinemediaobject.  I would favor avoiding it since it might make people 
    ask for adding hyphens to other elements.
    
    I also did not camel-case the name, even though in SGML days that appears to
    have been done, we have gone to lower-case since we moved to XML where case 
    matters and my own experience with camel-case indicates it is harder for 
    people to remember than all lower- or upper-case.
    
    I would prefer merge to override although I don't consider either of them to
    be accurate.  I don't think adding resource to info is really making it 
    clearer what is going on.
    
    Regards,
    Larry Rowland
    
    It's no wonder that truth is stranger than fiction. 
    Fiction has to make sense.
    - Mark Twain
    
    


  • 4.  Re: [docbook-tc] assembly metadata container

    Posted 02-23-2010 08:23
    On 22 February 2010 17:25, Bob Stayton