RE: DOCBOOK: Re: any reason why a "procedure" is not a child of "para"?

[David Cramer <dcramer@motive.com>]

Nested procedures, procedures inside of tables, etc. would be messy--not
sure how you'd number them. <substeps> allows you to nest procedures
without that problem. I think no procedures in paras is a good thing.

David

-----Original Message-----
From: Norman Walsh [mailto:ndw@nwalsh.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 6:43 AM
To: docbook mailing list
Subject: DOCBOOK: Re: any reason why a "procedure" is not a child of
"para"?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

/ "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@mindspring.com> was heard to say:
|   i just noticed that the procedure element cannot be a child
| of a para, as can other lists.  any reason for this?  it seems
| like this would be useful if a procedure should be considered
| part of its enclosing paragraph.  just curious.

I don't recall consciously deciding to exclude it. File an RFE, I guess.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

- -- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | Debugging is 99% complete most of
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | the time--Fred Brooks, jr.
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee |