This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the DocBook project.
Re: DocBook 4.0: ClassSynopsis
Norman Walsh wrote:
> / Dmitry Tsitelov <firstname.lastname@example.org> was heard to say:
> | > In real life, the attlists will also include local extension
> | > parameter entities and role attributes.
> | >
> | > <!ELEMENT ClassSynopsis - - (Modifier*,
> | > (ClassName|InterfaceName|ExceptionName)+,
> | > (ClassSynopsisInfo
> | > |FieldSynopsis|%method.synop.class;)*)>
> | >
> | . . .
> | Excuse me for possible misunderstanding, but how this model allow to specify
> | such attributes of inheritance, as virtual /public/private inheritance in
> | C++ ? I'm sure, there are such attributes in other languages too.
> Those are all "modifiers" in this model (remember, we're documenting not
> The question of inheritance is still on the table. I think that
> for the purposes of documentation, a simple list of class names
> and the semantic that the class names after the first are
> superclasses is sufficient, but a number of people disagree.
> I'm reluctant to add a lot of structure here mostly because I
> don't want the resulting structure to be biased towards a
> particular programming language if that can be avoided. I also
> don't want to give the impression that it is a goal that you
> should be able to generate code from these synopses or
Excuse me again, but how must be documented C++ classes like this one:
class Rectangle_with_data: virtual Shape, virtual Data_container
"virtual" keywords are very important in this situation for class behavior
May be, such modification of ClassSynopsis will be more acceptable:
<!ELEMENT ClassSynopsis - - ( ( Modifier*,
This variant allows to specify modifiers for each
class/inheritance/exception-name, not only for first. I thin it is not very
complex, and language independed.