Bernhard--
I'll just comment on one thing, then shut up :-). It appears you're
already familiar with LaTeX. It's possible to convert DocBook to LaTeX
using the dblatex program (http://dblatex.sourceforge.net/), and you can
create customizations to take advantage of other LaTeX packages,
Hi Bernhard,
You said:
> As long as there is no possible was to have a "proprietary"counter
for structures (as figures) structures do not have anindependent numbering.
The DocBook XSL stylesheets allow for a great deal of customization, so
it is possible to set up independent counters if
I.e. Semantically marked up docbook is clearly the wrong tool then.
Dave
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 14:20, Peter Desjardins
wrote:
>
> I think the table is adding valid semantic structure here. It allows the
> figure numbering to exist at the Docbook level, not in SVG.
>
> Maybe use elements
Hi,
Am Freitag, 12. Oktober 2018, 15:46:50 CEST schrieb Bernhard Kleine:
>
> @Peter: It seems that figure is a valid element, however, the numbering
> of figure for structures would conflict with the numbering a normal
> figure. As long as there is no possible was to have a "proprietary"
>
Hi, Peter and Thomas,
@Peter: It seems that figure is a valid element, however, the numbering
of figure for structures would conflict with the numbering a normal
figure. As long as there is no possible was to have a "proprietary"
counter for structures (as figures) structures do not have an
Hi,
Am Freitag, 12. Oktober 2018, 15:19:59 CEST schrieb Peter Desjardins:
> I think the table is adding valid semantic structure here. It allows the
> figure numbering to exist at the Docbook level, not in SVG.
>
> Maybe use elements inside an ? You could wrap the
> informaltable in an example
I think the table is adding valid semantic structure here. It allows the
figure numbering to exist at the Docbook level, not in SVG.
Maybe use elements inside an ? You could wrap the
informaltable in an example to give the entire set of diagrams a title.
Peter
Hi,
Am Freitag, 12. Oktober 2018, 14:12:15 CEST schrieb Bernhard Kleine:
> In my second mail to this threat a showed a complex table with
> structures, arrows labeling etc. I cannot envisage this without a table
> structure.
As Dave already pointed out, a table might not be the appropriate way
In my second mail to this threat a showed a complex table with
structures, arrows labeling etc. I cannot envisage this without a table
structure.
Bernhard
Am 12.10.2018 um 14:06 schrieb Dave Pawson:
> I might question if the table (as layout) is necessary for your purposes?
> That would
I might question if the table (as layout) is necessary for your purposes?
That would allow more flexibility in markup?
Dave
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 12:57, Bernhard Kleine wrote:
>
> Hi Jirka,
>
> This works but raises an error: equation must not occur among the
> children or descendants of table
Hi Jirka,
This works but raises an error: equation must not occur among the
children or descendants of table
It transforms anyhow.
Thanks for the hint.
Bernhard
Am 11.10.2018 um 16:45 schrieb Jirka Kosek:
> On 11.10.2018 16:26, Bernhard Kleine wrote:
>> unfortunately, using figures does not
On 11.10.2018 16:26, Bernhard Kleine wrote:
> unfortunately, using figures does not work in my example for the
> following reasons. It seems not possible to arrange a couple of figure
> inside a table: I show to you an example of a table containing
> structures and errors and labelling:
You can
Hi, Bernhard.
It sounds like you should be using the formal title numbering behavior
of one of the existing elements like example or figure. I hope I'm not
misunderstanding, is your problem that you are using those elements
already, and you need a custom formal element to hold *only* chemical
Hi,
this is for sure not the first instance of numbering chemical structure
automatically during docbook transformation for print. But I can not
find an example to learn from.
I have the following example (of about 100 structures in my book). I
want have these structures numbered with a bold
14 matches
Mail list logo
