[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: DTDs: Teilite vs. Sdocbook

• To: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Subject: Re: DTDs: Teilite vs. Sdocbook
• From: Gregory Murphy <Gregory.Murphy@e...>
• Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 14:45:24 -0700 (PDT)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <6.0.0.12.0.20030730092327.04a51e78@i...>

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Jonathan Robie wrote:

> What are the relative advantages of these two DTDs? What are the relative 
> advantages of the set of tools available for each? Does either have an 
> advantage in terms of extensibility or compositionality with other schemas? 
> Are there other schemas I should be considering?

Each differs in its primary intent: DOCBOOK is for technical manuals, TEI
for extant books, especially those of scholarly interest. As a result, TEI
has phrase-level elements for marking up things like variants and errata,
and has special purpose structural elements for encoding verse and theatre.
DOCBOOK, on the other hand, has elements for capturing code, screen output,
commands and their arguments, etc.

I've never been at a loss of tools to support either.

// Gregory Murphy <Gregory.Murphy@s...>

                           ---------------
                           | DO YOU KNOW |
                           |      O      |
                           |     -|-     |
                           |     / \     |
                           |  THIS MAN?  |
                           ---------------

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: DTDs: Teilite vs. Sdocbook
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>

• References:
  • DTDs: Teilite vs. Sdocbook
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XHTML 2.0 (was DTDs: Teilite vs. Sdocbook)
• Next by Date: Re: URN vs URL
• Previous by thread: Re: DTDs: Teilite vs. Sdocbook
• Next by thread: Re: DTDs: Teilite vs. Sdocbook
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread