|Subject:||Re: [docbook-apps] Converting HTML to DocBook|
|From:||Bob Stayton (bo...@sagehill.net)|
|Date:||Jun 28, 2004 9:08:20 am|
----- Original Message ----- From: "Christian Hattemer" <c.ha...@arcor.de> To: <bo...@sagehill.net>; <docb...@lists.oasis-open.org> Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 4:16 AM Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] Converting HTML to DocBook
Bob Stayton wrote:
The HTML table support was just added, and I believe the bgcolor attribute was just missed. You should file a bug report on the DocBook SourceForge site so it gets fixed in the next release.
I'm not using the HTML table stuff (tr, td, etc.) but the normal row and entry elements.
Oh, I thought you said you were using the bgcolor attribute in your table cells, and that is only available on tr, td, th, and table.
TDG is rather short on HTML tables. Perhaps you could explain the idea behind this additional table model. Is it made for easy conversion of HTML into DocBook, while row and entry are still the prefered elements to make a table? As I said, making a website from my DocBook document is only one aspect, I also need to create a print version with XSL-FO.
It's not so much for conversion of HTML tables into DocBook, because the content models of entry and td differ completely. So you can't cut and paste an HTML table into DocBook. Rather, it was to make it easier for those people who are already familiar with HTML table coding to write tables in DocBook.
Actually, the CALS table model permits an <entry> to contain an <entrytbl>, which is a nested table.
In DocBook this isn't possible. Both entry and entrytbl can only be children of row. But while considering your statement I found that entrytbl may appear again in an entrytbl's row.
You are right, I got that wrong. An entrytbl is a replacement for entry in a row.
This allows more than one level of nesting. I was a little confused by the statement "The EntryTbl element allows for a single level of nesting within tables." in TDG.
Well, that statement is there because the CALS specification as put forth in OASIS Technical Memorandum TM9502:1995 says:
"The content model for an <entrytbl> is the same as that of a <tgroup> except that <tfoot> is omitted and <entrytbl> is self-excluding."
There is no way to express this part of the standard in DTD syntax. It is possible that more rich schema syntaxes can express this intent. So using multiply nested tables may mean your documents won't validate under some future schema. That's a pretty vague warning, though. More important for your purposes is whether the stylesheets work with them? I think so, but I've not tested them.
Bob Stayton Sagehill Enterprises DocBook Consulting bo...@sagehill.net