You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
A more stylistic point regards the arrangement of the basic elements: We propose to put the info element on top of the xml. From our point of view info element has a header character, so it belongs to the top.
And we propose to bind together the specification elements in a collection list with a specifications (with -s!) element. In our experience is more common model style in xml files as an "open" list mixed with other xml elements (info and introductions).
A more stylistic point regards the arrangement of the basic elements: We propose to put the info element on top of the xml. From our point of view info element has a header character, so it belongs to the top.
And we propose to bind together the specification elements in a collection list with a specifications (with -s!) element. In our experience is more common model style in xml files as an "open" list mixed with other xml elements (info and introductions).
So, the xml structure would look like this:
Instead of IDS 0.4.2:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: