|Joachim Ziegler||Oct 9, 2002 10:21 am|
|Steve Ball||Oct 9, 2002 3:21 pm|
|Joachim Ziegler||Oct 10, 2002 1:52 am|
|Norman Walsh||Oct 10, 2002 5:48 am|
|Robert P. J. Day||Oct 10, 2002 6:09 am|
|Joachim Ziegler||Oct 10, 2002 8:44 am|
|Dave Pawson||Oct 10, 2002 9:53 am|
|Joachim Ziegler||Oct 10, 2002 10:02 am|
|Michael P. Urban||Oct 10, 2002 11:34 am|
|Norman Walsh||Oct 11, 2002 8:07 am|
|Stephan Wiesner||Oct 11, 2002 8:26 am|
|Joachim Ziegler||Oct 11, 2002 8:54 am|
|Norman Walsh||Oct 11, 2002 9:03 am|
|Joachim Ziegler||Oct 11, 2002 9:30 am|
|mart...@myrnham.co.uk||Oct 11, 2002 9:30 am|
|Togan Muftuoglu||Oct 11, 2002 12:04 pm|
|Joachim Ziegler||Oct 11, 2002 1:18 pm|
|Dave Pawson||Oct 12, 2002 2:41 am|
|mart...@myrnham.co.uk||Oct 12, 2002 3:19 am|
|Joachim Ziegler||Oct 12, 2002 5:03 am|
|Togan Muftuoglu||Oct 12, 2002 6:36 am|
|mart...@myrnham.co.uk||Oct 16, 2002 12:14 am|
|Norman Walsh||Oct 16, 2002 6:50 am|
|Togan Muftuoglu||Oct 16, 2002 7:46 am|
|Norman Walsh||Oct 16, 2002 8:11 am|
|Togan Muftuoglu||Oct 16, 2002 8:31 am|
|mart...@myrnham.co.uk||Oct 16, 2002 9:11 am|
|Dave Pawson||Oct 16, 2002 10:27 am|
|Norman Walsh||Oct 17, 2002 5:13 am|
|Subject:||DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises|
|Date:||Oct 16, 2002 9:11:05 am|
Sounds like fair comments.
Given that there are DTDs around that deal specifically with Training & Courseware I guess users that opt for Docbook should be content with a more generalised approach.
Discussions so far have shown you're right about spawning more requests for flexibility (I've seen about 4 models so far) so a more generalised approach _would_ be more suitable.
I have to say that in the documents I've created so far, I've been quite happy with the existing elements and using a <section role="exercise"> to nest them in. It would, however, be more helpful to allow <exercise> specifically and nesting <exercisesection>s seems better than the <bridgehead>s I've used in the past.
Does it need to be <exercisesection>? Wouldn't just <section> work too?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
/ mart...@myrnham.co.uk was heard to say: | There seems to be a rough consensus on this now. What's the next step?
I think we need to see some more explicit description of the semantics and content models.
| Am Samstag, 12. Oktober 2002 12:13 schrieb mart...@myrnham.co.uk: |> <exercise> |> <exerciseinfo>...as in sectioninfo...</exerciseinfo> |> <setup>...information on what is needed to setup the exercise, |> student data etc...</setup> |> <scenario>...</scenario> |> <task> |> <objective>...</objective> |> <solution>...</solution> |> </task> |> <task> |> <objective>...</objective> |> <solution>...</solution> |> </task> |> ... |> </exercise>
I'm personally quite unhappy with this proposal as it's written. It adds five fairly general sounding element names (setup, scenario, task, objective, and solution) in a fairly narrow context. Experience suggests that this is too specific; it will work for some people, but it will spawn frequent requests for more flexibility and new special-purpose elements.
I'd be happier with a structure like this:
<exercise> <exerciseinfo>...</exerciseinfo> <exercisesection><title>Setup</title>... <exercisesection><title>Scenario</title>... <exercisesection><title>Task</title> <exercisesection><title>Objective</title> <exercisesection><title>Solution</title>
I'm not sure I like the element name "exercisesection" very much, but you see what I have in mind.
We have had some discussion of adding a floating section-like element, "topic". If we did that, then we might allow exercises to contain topics.
|> Some method of controlling Stylesheets would be required to enable | authors |> to display <solution>s or not depending on the documentation required. | For |> example, a Student version of the document might not contain <solution>s |> whereas the Tutor version of the document would contain everything. | | That would be really great!
The goal in designing the markup is to make sure that the structure contains enough information to drive the presentation you want.
Be seeing you, norm