Re: DOCBOOK-APPS: mixing section elements

[Roel Vanhout <roel at riks dot nl>]

Aha, ok, thanks, I read that the wrong way. Guess I'll have to figure 
out another way to mark this up :(
Just curious: what was the reasoning behind this?

cheers,

roel


Jeff Beal wrote:
> Actually, the DTD does indicate that you can't mix section types within a
> single element.  For example, the content model for <chapter/> has
> (sect1*|refentry*|section*|simplesect*).  In order to be able to
> mix-and-match section types, the content model would have to include
> (sect1|refentry|section|simplesect)*.
>
> Jeff Beal
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roel Vanhout [mailto:roel@riks.nl]
> Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 7:27 AM
> To: docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: DOCBOOK-APPS: mixing section elements
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> After my last question about a chunking problem I had I got the useful 
> suggestion to use <simplesect> for sections I didn't want to chunk 
> (thanks Jannig!). I wrote it with vim, tried it on my machine, worked 
> fine; stylesheets seem to accept it ok. But then I passed the file to 
> the author that will work on the document. She's using (evaluating for 
> the moment) Arbortext's Epic editor to edit the document, and it 
> complained that <simplesect> was out of context when it's parent node 
> also had <sect1> or <section> elements, eg like this:
>
> <chapter>
>    <title>Example title</title>
>    <sect1><para>Test para</para></sect1>
>    <simplesect><para>Another test para</para></simplesect>
> </chapter>
>
> I also couldn't add a <simplesect> element as a sibling to a <sect1>, 
> <sect2> or <section> element through Epic's GUI.
> I looked through the documentation (tdg) and looked at the content model 
> of chapter, and although I'm not an expert at reading dtd's, it looks 
> like my example should be valid. Now, the dtd that Epic uses is that for 
> DocBook 4.0; has this changed in the mean time? Did I read the content 
> model wrong? Any hints? Thanks!
>
> cheers,
>
> roel