On Tue, 2004-08-31 at 18:33, Karsten Wade wrote: > In many situations, I'm not even sure I want any styling for the > contents of _some_ of my <screen> and <programlisting> blocks (esp. > <programlisting>). It should be unstyled fixed-width fonts, no bold, no > extra fancy characters, no matter if it's utf-8 or iso-whatever. <grin/> Which is a pretty good definition of a style IMHO. > If that is the case, then we wouldn't use CDATA blocks for <screen>. > FWIW, putting CDATA in e.g. <computeroutput/> does not validate, but it > does build PDF and HTML. Its not a validity issue. Simply well-formedness. > * We modify current usage rules to show a couple of acceptable styles > and which ones are likely to break or cause problems. Specify that the > point is not XML styling but quality of output -- if your code gets the > desired output of no extra vertical or horizontal whitespace in PDF or > HTML, then it's fine. -1. I'd have thought the project needs valid XML instances. > > * <screen> has <computeroutput> or <userinput> within it to be > semantically correct. Why isn't screen 'right' for the contents of the screen? Or if you are talking about a programs output, or a user input, then use computeroutput or userinput. > > * <programlisting> always uses a CDATA section to preserve every detail > from processing (XSL and CSS included). But thats the point of stylesheets Karsten, to apply style. http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-20040204/#sec-cdata-sect An example of a CDATA section, in which "<greeting>" and "</greeting>" are recognized as character data, not markup: <![CDATA[<greeting>Hello, world!</greeting>]]> That's all CDATA sections do. -- Regards DaveP. XSLT&Docbook FAQ http://www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl
