I'm trying to add a set of step-by-step instructions to
an example. Wouldn't this be a perfect use of
<procedure>? However, procedure isn't allowed in <example>.
Could the DTD please be updated to allow <procedure> as
a child of <example>?
I personally think DocBook is overly prescriptive
with regard to where it allows procedure to be used.
This runs counter to one of the fundamental design
principles that DocBook has had from its beginning: To
be descriptive rather than prescriptive.
I can't see any good reason why a procedure should not
be allowed within an example.
The procedure element has from the beginning basically
just been an orderedlist with a semantic name-- a list
wrapper for a set up steps rather than listitems. But
still basically an orderedlist. If it really were a
model for a real procedure, we wouldn't have needed to
add the task element.
So we should allow it anywhere where orderedlist is valid.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
The Committee accepted the premise, but expressed concern
about putting an element that can have a title inside
a formal element that has a title. Since the
inner title is optional, it is the author's call.
ACCEPTED. Too late for 4.4, however.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Logged In: YES
user_id=118135
I agree.
I personally think DocBook is overly prescriptive
with regard to where it allows procedure to be used.
This runs counter to one of the fundamental design
principles that DocBook has had from its beginning: To
be descriptive rather than prescriptive.
I can't see any good reason why a procedure should not
be allowed within an example.
The procedure element has from the beginning basically
just been an orderedlist with a semantic name-- a list
wrapper for a set up steps rather than listitems. But
still basically an orderedlist. If it really were a
model for a real procedure, we wouldn't have needed to
add the task element.
So we should allow it anywhere where orderedlist is valid.
Logged In: YES
user_id=193218
The Committee accepted the premise, but expressed concern
about putting an element that can have a title inside
a formal element that has a title. Since the
inner title is optional, it is the author's call.
ACCEPTED. Too late for 4.4, however.