Ross Gardler wrote: > > How about something like: > > "A markup element that defines a logical "chunk" of data within the > structural make-up of a page. For example, the navigation menu is one > such "chunk" of data, whilst the main body is another. Each chunk can be > given individual styling information at the final output stage. Each > forrest:hook may contain zero or more forrest:hook children." > > (this is still clumsy but at least it removes implementation specific > details)
We can refine the definitions. See below. > >Are short Glossary Entries like this going to be good enough, with links to > >further references and code examples? > > I think this particular example illustrates pretty well why I think we > need to avoid code in glossary entries - there really is not enough > space to deal with all the possible examples. Yes, i reckon keep them as concise as possible. Then use the notes column (with short text) to link to other info). Gav, just start off with finding some terms that you think need explaining and add entries with empty definitions or make an attempt to define them. Other fellows can help to flesh it out. Don't make the mistake of waiting until you have it complete before sending a patch. In that way others can help. See also site-author/content/xdocs/TR/2005/WD-forrest10.html In draft and in need of attention, but has some terms and some definitions. -David
