This is the mail archive of the
docbook@lists.oasis-open.org
mailing list for the DocBook project.
Re: para versus simpara?
- From: Karl Eichwalder <ke at gnu dot franken dot de>
- To: docbook at lists dot oasis-open dot org
- Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:55:53 +0100
- Subject: DOCBOOK: Re: para versus simpara?
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0211202121240.31141-100000@dell><87el88fp4f.fsf@nwalsh.com>
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> writes:
> Some users want to prevent paragraphs from containing "block" elements
> (as HTML does). The simpara element gives them an alternative to para
> that has the semantics they want. And they can make a customization
> layer that's a proper subset of DocBook simply by removing the 'para'
> element from the DTD.
I like the TEI way more to accomplish some such alternative
definition: don't introduce a new element but redefine the standard
element using a parameter inside your internal doctype declaration.
--
ke@suse.de (work) / keichwa@gmx.net (home): |
http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/ | ,__o
Free Translation Project: | _-\_<,
http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/contrib/po/HTML/ | (*)/'(*)