Mats, This is something I've been thinking about. I've considered modifying our schema to allow section to appear at the root of books....and then kludging that to work downstream by simply converting, in a preprocessing step, the first level of sections to chapters.
One could use DocBook 5.1 assemblies to get around the limitations of sections, by transforming them as needed into other elements. But I keep thinking that our system would be simpler if we routinely used sections everywhere. I guess it's obvious that it would be simpler. But I think the simplification would be worth it. We typically author books which are consumed as pdfs and as chunked html; the chunked html is used more; and the chunked html makes book-oriented elements like prefaces and appendices less prominent and less important. So I think the tradeoff of not having other elements at the root of the book would be worthwhile. --Aaron DaMommio On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 7:48 AM, Mats Broberg <[email protected]> wrote: > Greetings, > > > > In DocBook, the “section” element cannot appear directly under “book” or > “part”, but must have a “chapter” parent. So what to do if a “section” is > reused (as xincludes) between publications and sometimes must appear at the > “chapter” level and sometimes at a “section” and even a subsection level? > > > > “section” is allowed directly under “article”, but “article” seems like > the wrong element for a 300+ page publication (such as a manual). > > > > Best regards, > > Mats > -- -------------------------------------- Aaron DaMommio: Husband, father, writer, juggler, and expert washer of dishes. - My blog: http://aarondamommio.blogspot.com - Need a juggler? http://amazingaaronjuggler.blogspot.com/ =======================================
