Subject: Re: [jats-list] BITS: Is there a canonical way to group multiple appendices and a glossary under a single 'Appendix' heading? From: Wendell Piez <wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 12:23:39 -0400 |
Hi, Yes, and with maddeningly complete freedom comes maddeningly complete responsibility. :-) This is the point where I'd start asking about the larger strategy regarding conformance, customization and local use. In some circumstances I might prefer to subset my profile of the DTD quite severely, deprecating 'app' with a few other similarly problematic structural elements. I might allow them in JATS outputs generated for purposes of interchange, but to keep my models and processing simple and consistent (and to avoid twists like this one), I might stick with 'sec' internally (with appropriate @sec-type to constrain, validate and drive processing). Of course, this is a kind of customization, albeit not at the level of the DTD itself. In others, I might agree with Nikos and superset, not subset, the DTD, allowing glossary in more places. Especially if I had reason to think this wouldn't force me to go the other way again to interchange with others expecting strict conformance. :-) I think this sort of stress between the formal models and the requirements of the real world is inevitable, especially when we get to books. Falling back on generic elements makes a good solution in many (not all) cases, but where the standard can adapt to particulars without twisting itself into knots, that's usually even better. Cheers, Wendell Wendell Piez | http://www.wendellpiez.com XML | XSLT | electronic publishing Eat Your Vegetables _____oo_________o_o___ooooo____ooooooo_^ On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Debbie Lapeyre <dalapeyre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sep 3, 2013, at 6:33 PM, Wendell Piez <wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> (Now I'm with Gerrit. It does seem a bit like the tail >> wagging the dog. If any book-part can have back matter, then the back >> matter inside any one of them is its own, not the back matter in some >> larger undefined scope.) My own compromise might be to render the >> appendix and glossary as generic 'sec' (with @sec-type) so they could >> be in the body of the book-part. > > > You may call it a <sec> inside either <body> or <back>. > There is maddeningly complete freedom on this point. > The outer 'Appendix' could be a <sec>, the <app> inside it > could then be <sec>s too. Your choice, but I'd call an > <app> and <app>. > > --Debbie > > ================================================================ > Deborah A Lapeyre mailto:dalapeyre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Mulberry Technologies, Inc. http://www.mulberrytech.com > 17 West Jefferson Street Phone: 301-315-9631 (USA) > Suite 207 Fax: 301-315-8385 > Rockville, MD 20850 > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Mulberry Technologies: Consultancy for XML, XSLT, and Schematron > ================================================================
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [jats-list] BITS: Is there a ca, Debbie Lapeyre | Thread | Re: [jats-list] BITS: Is there a ca, Imsieke, Gerrit, le- |
Re: [jats-list] Training on JATS XM, Debbie Lapeyre | Date | [jats-list] inline tables, Kirsten Howard |
Month |