Re: DocBook and ITS

Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> Jirka Kosek wrote:
>> Yes, I can understand this, but you can have one set of namespaced
>> attributes for instances, and second unnamespaced set for documentRules.
> 
> yes, you could. but its nice to have a single schema fragment
> used in both cases, and only one lot of XML processing code
> to maintain.
> 
> alter all, writing a <documentRules> file is not a constant
> daily occurrence where the slight verbosity is an irritant.
> 
> 
>>   <documentRules xmlns:its="http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its"
>>                  xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/11/its">
>>       <ns its:prefix="db" its:uri="http://docbook.org/ns/docbook"/>
>>       <documentRule its:translate="no"
>>                     its:translateSelector="//db:para/@*"/>
>>       <documentRule its:translate="yes"
>>                     its:translateSelector="//db:para"/>
>>   </documentRules>
>>
>> (yes, this last example looks quite ugly)
> 
> I am not sure why, to be honest...
> 
>> I don't see problem with having two sets of attributes. Moreover their
>> meaning is quite different. Namespaced attributes define ITS properties
>> for the current element, and unnamespaced for elements referenced by
>> documentRule.
> but in practice a processing application may read the rules
> file, and copy attributes to an instance tree. Its a shame if
> it cannot just copy attribute nodes.
> 
>>> The RelaxNG patterns can be generated with a prefix
>>> by setting the parameter "patternPrefix" to "its."
>>> when the XSLT script is called.
>> Cool! Do you think that the next version of WD can have RNG/RNC schemas
>> with this change incorporated?
> 
> sure, it just means Felix has to add that parameter setting
> to the shell script he runs.
> 

will do.

- Felix