On 6.8.2013 12:38, John Lumley wrote:
> On 05/08/2013 10:02, Adam Retter wrote:
>>> What about bin:subpart() ?
>> I think just bin:part() would be enough
> Sounds pretty good to me - simple, doesn't conflict with anything else
> as far as I can see. Can anyone see some other meaning or possible
> conflict that we've overlooked?
bin:part() seems OK, we can also consider bin:block()
Jirka
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jirka Kosek e-mail: jirka@kosek.cz http://xmlguru.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------
Professional XML consulting and training services
DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
------------------------------------------------------------------
OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 rep.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Bringing you XML Prague conference http://xmlprague.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------