procedure and list

Tim Bergsma tbergsma at kbs.msu.edu
Wed Aug 28 11:19:14 PDT 2002


Matt,

I just saw your note about procedure.  

1) I didn't realize that procedure/step/substep were above para rather
than under it.  But it doesn't really bother me.  I think I could easily
stylesheet around it.

2) One thing that does bother me is that, despite their neutral tag
names (e.g. a procedure could be either a descriptive method or a
prescriptive protocol) the DocBook people have actually defined
procedure in the prescriptive sense.  Maybe doesn't matter, but will
their ever be compatibility issues?

3) By now you will have seen my previous note.  I'm betting that your
most recent example of nested lists is not DocBook compatible.  I'd be
very happy to be wrong.

4) I just downloaded eml beta9 from the web, and have been studying
protocol.  Now, if I understand correctly, this is what Peter proposes
to rename as methods.  It contains 0 to many methodsteps, which contain
descriptions, which contain paragraphs (and methodsteps?  I don't
understand that part yet).  
a.  If TextType replaces paragraph, AND contains procedure/step/substep,
then it allows some contorted element paths, as I believe Matt pointed
out.  
b.  One might propose replacing the zero-to-many methodsteps with a
single TextType, containing procedure/step/substep. Elegant, but you
lose instrumentation, software, and qualitycontrol, and (indirect)
citation, unless you extend DocBook (which is theoretically possible,
but ugly?).  
c.  If you leave TextType under description, and forego
procedure/step/substep...it may show up again anyway someday if you
adopt DocBook more formally, and you still have the stylistic
awkwardness that paragraph is repeatable for three reasons:  because of
DocBook structure, because TextType is repeatable, and because
methodStep is repeatable. (The style problem also pertains to a. above.)

If it is no problem to extend DocBook, then b. is superior.  Otherwise,
maybe c.  I'm still not sure how all this relates to protocol, but I'm
going back to re-read Peter's proposals....

regards,

Tim.
-- 
Tim Bergsma
LTER Information Manager
W.K. Kellogg Biological Station
Michigan State University
Hickory Corners, MI   49060
616/671-2337
tbergsma at kbs.msu.edu
http://lter.kbs.msu.edu



More information about the Eml-dev mailing list