[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference vaxuum::document_ft

Title:	DOCUMENT T1.0
Notice:	New notesfile (DOCUMENT.NOTE) now available (see note 897)
Moderator:	CLOSET::ADLER

Created:	Mon Feb 09 1987
Last Modified:	Thu Oct 31 1991
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	897
Total number of notes:	4397

73.0. "Is <BACK_MATTER> an element ?" by GRAMPS::MYERS (memory_CSSE) Sun Mar 08 1987 12:16

    Using a PROFILE which specifies a <FRONT_MATTER>, <PART>, and
    <APPENDIX> elements, I get the following error message when I
    process the book (using the GENERAL doctype):
    
    %TAG-E-NOZONEYET ....
    
    The jist of the error message is that I have used the <APPENDIX>
    tag w/o first specifying BACK_MATTER.
    
    When I added the <BACK_MATTER> tag within the PROFILE, it was
    apparently ignored as I got the same error message.
    
    To get around the problem I simply added the <BACK_MATTER> and
    <ENDBACK_MATTER> tags to my appendix file (I only had one 
    appendix file).
    
    Does this imply that <BACK_MATTER> is a reconized element or am
    I simply coding something incorrectly ?   I have reviewed both
    the release notes and sections 7.4 and 8 of the User Guide Part
    1 to no avail.
    
    PS: the PROFILE examples shown in the user guide part 1 in chapter
    8 imply the use of APPENDIX elements.  If it is necessary to add
    the BACK_MATTER tags, what happens if there are more that one
    appendix ?

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
73.1	Add <back_matter> ... <endback_matter> to Appendix FIles	STAR::ETZEL	Mike	`Mon Mar 09 1987 16:29`	9
	Within each appendix file: 1. Precede each <appendix> with a <back_matter> 2. Follow each <endappendix> with an <endback_matter> Each appendix (and other book element tags) needs to be in a separate file for cross-referencing to work. Thus, each appendix file is an element in your profile.
73.2	Sorry, it IS confusing.	VAXUUM::KOHLBRENNER		`Mon Mar 09 1987 16:49`	14
	If you are confused by <front_matter> ... <endfront_matter> and <back_matter> ... <endback_matter> and the fact that <front_matter> IS an element, but <back_matter> IS NOT an element, then you have a logical mind. You are confused because it is confusing. :-) We have been trying to accomplish a number of conflicting goals with these tags and the result is confusion. We're taking another look at it as I write this, and maybe we can alter it to be less confusing. Lacking that we can at least document it better so that you'll KNOW it is confusing instead of just worrying about why you are confused. Stay tuned.
73.3		MARTY::FRIEDMAN		`Tue Mar 10 1987 10:20`	11
	Why not get rid of <back_matter>? If it's only there to "balance" <front_matter>, then it's unnecessary because backmatter and frontmatter are very different to begin with. When you have a book with 6 appendixes, a glossary, followed by an index, somehow the idea of backmatter doesn't seem appropriate. On the other hand, you'll rarely if ever find a frontmatter more than a dozen or so pages. Marty
73.4	gone!	CLOSET::ANKLAM		`Fri Mar 20 1987 13:18`	7
	DONE. <BACK_MATTER> is herewith 'disabled'. The tag translator will ignore it, if present. It's been very clear that its requirement presented a severe usability problem. Guess that's what field test is for! patti anklam
73.5	Impact on Documentation	CLOSET::ETZEL	Mike	`Sat Mar 21 1987 00:27`	7
	So that means that <back_matter> and <endback_matter> will no longer be amongst the global tags? <back_matter> also ceases to be a required tag for <appendix> and <glossay> in the User's Guide? Sounds good to me!
73.6	noted	CLOSET::ANKLAM		`Mon Mar 23 1987 09:03`	7
	that is correct. the writers have been notified. I think taking all the references to <back_matter> out is a far simpler task than explaining when and why it's required! patti