Dividers and fleurons

In certain types of print publications (say, opinion pieces
written by a 
columnist for a weekly magazine or a newspaper) it is fairly
typical 
that the author may organize his paragraphs into logical
sections 
_without_ using subheadings.

Instead, we may see a (more or less) graphical divider -
often something 
simple, like these three asterisks, centered on a single
line:

* * *

(Large round dots - such as U+25CF - or squares are also
often seen 
instead of asterisks.)

A similar practice can be encountered in books - especially
old ones - 
where flower or leaf motifs (properly called
"fleurons") may be used at 
the end of chapters, or for divisions within a chapter. Here
are some 
fonts which contain such motifs...

 <ht
tp://www.myfonts.com/browse/keyword/fleuron/>

...and here's an article which discusses the topic:

 <http://ww
w.wijnne.com/w/typography.html>

* * *

Now, my question becomes: what is the semantically correct
way of 
marking up these kind of logical divisions within a DocBook
(XML) 
document?

In HTML documents, the closest logical markup equivalent
would appear to 
be <hr> - the horizontal rule - but I could not find
anything quite like 
that in DocBook. The only thing I could come up with was the

<bridgehead> element, but I'm a bit undecided about it
- is it 
appropriate to use it that way, or is there a better
alternative?

-- 
znark 


------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-unsubscribelists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-helplists.oasis-open.org

I don't know what others think, but the answer seems obvious
to me:
<section>

All you have to do is change the XSLT so that sections are
rendered
with the dividers you want.

On 1/29/07, Jukka Aho <jukka.ahoiki.fi> wrote:
> In certain types of print publications (say, opinion
pieces written by a
> columnist for a weekly magazine or a newspaper) it is
fairly typical
> that the author may organize his paragraphs into
logical sections
> _without_ using subheadings.
>
> Instead, we may see a (more or less) graphical divider
- often something
> simple, like these three asterisks, centered on a
single line:
>
> * * *
>
> (Large round dots - such as U+25CF - or squares are
also often seen
> instead of asterisks.)
>
> A similar practice can be encountered in books -
especially old ones -
> where flower or leaf motifs (properly called
"fleurons") may be used at
> the end of chapters, or for divisions within a chapter.
Here are some
> fonts which contain such motifs...
>
>  <ht
tp://www.myfonts.com/browse/keyword/fleuron/>
>
> ...and here's an article which discusses the topic:
>
>  <http://ww
w.wijnne.com/w/typography.html>
>
> * * *
>
> Now, my question becomes: what is the semantically
correct way of
> marking up these kind of logical divisions within a
DocBook (XML)
> document?
>
> In HTML documents, the closest logical markup
equivalent would appear to
> be <hr> - the horizontal rule - but I could not
find anything quite like
> that in DocBook. The only thing I could come up with
was the
> <bridgehead> element, but I'm a bit undecided
about it - is it
> appropriate to use it that way, or is there a better
alternative?
>
> --
> znark
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------
---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-unsubscribelists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-helplists.oasis-open.org
>
>


-- 
http://chris.chiasson.nam
e/

------------------------------------------------------------
---------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-unsubscribelists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-helplists.oasis-open.org

Peter Ring <PRImagnus.dk>, 2007-01-30 10:56 +0100:

> What you describe is called a <separator> in
XHTML2 [1][2]. One
> can argue about the merrits of "loose" empty
presentational
> elements [3].
[...]
> I'd use <bridgehead renderas="other"
otherrenderas="separator"/>
> (DocBook 5) or <bridgehead
role="separator"/>.

I guess I don't see why Jukka couldn't just mark those
instance up
using nested sections (as Chris suggested) -

  <section>
    <title>* * * </title>

...or whatever fleuron character is used.

He could tune stylesheet parameters to prevent those from
appearing in the ToC.

He did after all say that the primary purpose was to handle
the
case where an "author organize his paragraphs into
logical
sections" but just without subheadings. It seems to me
in that
case the fleurons are simply taking the place of a text
title.

The case he mentions of using fleurons to mark the end of
chapters
seems like a different case and doesn't need to be handled
with
markup in the source at all (can be done just through
stylesheet
customization).

   --Mike

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jukka Aho [mailto:jukka.ahoiki.fi]
> > Sent: 30. januar 2007 02:14
> > To: docbooklists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: [docbook] Dividers and fleurons
> > 
> > 
> > In certain types of print publications (say,
opinion pieces 
> > written by a 
> > columnist for a weekly magazine or a newspaper) it
is fairly typical 
> > that the author may organize his paragraphs into
logical sections 
> > _without_ using subheadings.
> > 
> > Instead, we may see a (more or less) graphical
divider - 
> > often something 
> > simple, like these three asterisks, centered on a
single line:
> > 
> > * * *
> > 
> > (Large round dots - such as U+25CF - or squares
are also often seen 
> > instead of asterisks.)
> > 
> > A similar practice can be encountered in books -
especially 
> > old ones - 
> > where flower or leaf motifs (properly called
"fleurons") may 
> > be used at 
> > the end of chapters, or for divisions within a
chapter. Here are some 
> > fonts which contain such motifs...
> > 
> >  <ht
tp://www.myfonts.com/browse/keyword/fleuron/>
> > 
> > ...and here's an article which discusses the
topic:
> > 
> >  <http://ww
w.wijnne.com/w/typography.html>
> > 
> > * * *
> > 
> > Now, my question becomes: what is the semantically
correct way of 
> > marking up these kind of logical divisions within
a DocBook (XML) 
> > document?
> > 
> > In HTML documents, the closest logical markup
equivalent 
> > would appear to 
> > be <hr> - the horizontal rule - but I could
not find anything 
> > quite like 
> > that in DocBook. The only thing I could come up
with was the 
> > <bridgehead> element, but I'm a bit
undecided about it - is it 
> > appropriate to use it that way, or is there a
better alternative?
> > 

-- 
Michael(tm) Smith
http://people.w3.org/mike/