Subject: Re: [jats-list] A question on <related-object> From: "Wendell Piez wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 16:51:21 -0000 |
Hi, On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Nikos Markantonatos nikos@xxxxxxxxxx <jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I have noticed that some "best practice" comments added on BITS > documentation stipulate that the @document-id must always be present, even > if the related object may be an entire book and not a specific chapter > within the book, or a specific figure within that chapter. In fact, the > comments state that "If the source and document are the same, the @source-id > attribute should be empty". Is this indeed the idea? I have the same question. Surely what is meant is "if @source-id is not given or has no value, the value of @document-id may be provided for it." Or something - I think it's not clear what's meant by 'empty' here. At first reading, it makes it seem as though it's saying that source-id="" means something different from no @source-id at all, or maybe it doesn't (if something can be 'empty' by not being there at all). And that if both attributes are provided with the same value, that's wrong (since "If the source and document are the same, the @source-id attribute should be empty) .... Cheers, Wendell -- Wendell Piez | http://www.wendellpiez.com XML | XSLT | electronic publishing Eat Your Vegetables _____oo_________o_o___ooooo____ooooooo_^
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[jats-list] A question on <related-, Nikos Markantonatos | Thread | [jats-list] Re: <related-object> of, Nikos Markantonatos |
Re: [jats-list] Software for cross-, Wendell Piez wapiez@ | Date | [jats-list] Re: <related-object> of, Nikos Markantonatos |
Month |