Dear Hussein, FYI In the issue Norman Walsh write:
> You can put numbers in override, and you can use a custom schema to or > Schematron rules to assert that only (non-negative) integer values are > provided. Having numeration continue from that number would be a stylesheet > issue, I think. > > The reference to type of mark is a consequence of the fact that listitem > is used in both ordered and itemized lists. And variable lists, come to > that. I'll see if I can clarify that part in the next version of The > Definitive Guide. > Best Regards, Albert On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 11:25 AM Albert <albert.te...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Hussein, > > Thank you for your reply. > > My personal opinion on this matter is a little bit different. > >> There are probably several other attributes not rendered by our DocBook >> CSS stylesheets simply because we don't know about them and/or >> understand them and/or find them really useful. >> > > - When conforming to a standard one would expect that the > implementer(s) know(s) about the standard, it can happen that an > implementer does not know all details but when pointed out to it I think it > could be implemented > - Understanding of the standard, a standard is often not easy to > understand / read but when it should be clarified with the standard writers > or with the comunity > - When conforming to a standard one would expect that personal > preferences are not taken into account in respect to what should be > implemented, it is possible to prioritize then features to be implemented. > > --> We are sorry but we don't plan to implement attribute >> listitem/@override in our DocBook CSS stylesheets. Two reasons for that: >> >> 1) You are the very first user to request its support in near 20 years >> of existence of XMLmind XML Editor. >> >> 2) This attribute is documented as: >> --- >> override(NMTOKEN) Specifies the keyword for the type of mark that should >> be used on >> this item, instead of the mark that would be used by default >> > > > 1. it is not relevant that I'm the first one asking for it in 20 years > (is it already that long in the docbook standard?), it is a feature present > in the standard, so the 3-rd point of my above remark hold here > 2. The standard here is indeed a bit vague / hard to understand: > 1. an NMTOKEN is not an integer and thus could be anything (in my > case it is guaranteed an integer, but that is not relevant here) > 2. it indeed states "that the type of mark that should be used on *this > *item" so > 1. what to do with subsequent items? For the value attribute of > the li tag in HTML this is clearly specified, here it is > specified that it is only for "*this *item" where the word *this > *is in italics emphasizing that it is just for 1 (this) item > 2. is says " the type of mark " what is the type here? > > Seen this I think it is correct that that the "override" attribute is not > equivalent with the li tag its value attribute. > > I hope this all makes a bit sense, I also updated the github issue. > > Best Regards, > > Albert > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 9:49 AM Hussein Shafie <huss...@xmlmind.com> wrote: > >> On 10/2/21 18:38, Albert wrote: >> > Dear Hussein, >> > >> > I had contact through the >> > mentioned:https://github.com/docbook/docbook/issues/222 >> > <https://github.com/docbook/docbook/issues/222> >> > >> > And got as answer back: >> > >> > This already exists. The @OverRide <https://github.com/OverRide> >> > attribute on a DocBook orderedlist/listitem element will cause the >> > DocBook XSL stylesheet to output a @value <https://github.com/value >> > >> > attribute on the corresponding HTML <li> element. >> > >> > >> > My test shows that in the XMLMind Docbook viewer the override is not >> > taken into account, but when converting the document to HTML or PDF the >> > override is taken into account. >> > My first impression is that this is a small omission in the Docbook >> > viewer of XMLMind. >> > Is my impression correct? >> >> Yes, that's right. We didn't know about listitem/@override, therefore >> this attribute is not rendered by our DocBook CSS stylesheets. >> >> >> >> --> Similarly, we didn't know about itemizedlist/@mark. Hence not >> rendered by our DocBook CSS stylesheets. >> --- >> mark(NMTOKEN) >> >> Identifies the type of mark to be used on items in this list >> --- >> https://tdg.docbook.org/tdg/5.1/itemizedlist.html >> >> There are probably several other attributes not rendered by our DocBook >> CSS stylesheets simply because we don't know about them and/or >> understand them and/or find them really useful. >> >> >> >> --> We are sorry but we don't plan to implement attribute >> listitem/@override in our DocBook CSS stylesheets. Two reasons for that: >> >> 1) You are the very first user to request its support in near 20 years >> of existence of XMLmind XML Editor. >> >> 2) This attribute is documented as: >> --- >> override(NMTOKEN) >> >> Specifies the keyword for the type of mark that should be used on >> this item, instead of the mark that would be used by default >> --- >> See https://tdg.docbook.org/tdg/5.1/listitem.html >> >> which is a poor specification that could be understood as: >> --- >> the label of this listitem is *anything* you want (e.g. "[Foo-22]") >> --- >> >> That is, not really the equivalent of li/@value: >> --- >> The value attribute, if present, must be a valid integer. It is used to >> determine the ordinal value of the list item, when the li's list owner >> is an ol element. >> --- >> See >> https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/grouping-content.html#attr-li-value >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > Best Regards, >> > >> > Albert >> > >> >
-- XMLmind XML Editor Support List xmleditor-support@xmlmind.com http://www.xmlmind.com/mailman/listinfo/xmleditor-support
