Re: [docbook-apps] html 5, as a target

Dave Pawson wrote: > Structural markup would better match docbook semantics. You mean those new elements which are not working in IE6 & IE7? http://blog.whatwg.org/supporting-new-elements-in-ie > Generally a move forward from html 4. From markup point of view HTML5 is a mess. No grammar, no sc

Re: [docbook-apps] html 5, as a target

On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 13:46:30 +0200 Jirka Kosek wrote: > Dave Pawson wrote: > > > Reading http://diveintohtml5.org/ and wondering if people think it > > would make a good target for docbook? > > Possibly as a replacement for html, more likely as a choice? > > What would be advantages of produci

Re: [docbook-apps] html 5, as a target

Agreed Jirka, HTML5 doesn't seem to offer anything more to Docbook than HTML4 does. Ron On 8/14/10 6:46 AM, Jirka Kosek wrote: Dave Pawson wrote: Reading http://diveintohtml5.org/ and wondering if people think it would make a good target for docbook? Possibly as a replacement for html, more l

Re: [docbook-apps] html 5, as a target

Dave Pawson wrote: > Reading http://diveintohtml5.org/ and wondering if people think it > would make a good target for docbook? > Possibly as a replacement for html, more likely as a choice? What would be advantages of producing HTML5 over HTML4 from DocBook sources? Honestly, interesting parts

[docbook-apps] html 5, as a target

Reading http://diveintohtml5.org/ and wondering if people think it would make a good target for docbook? Possibly as a replacement for html, more likely as a choice? Thoughts? regards Dave Pawson http://www.dpawson.co.uk XSLT, XSL-FO and docbook FAQ -- regards