This question of whether to have recursive generic division elements
or numbered division elements comes up a lot, and both approaches have
advantages, depending on the tools to be used and the extent of reuse
of content anticipated.

I don't know of any tools that would automatically indicate nesting
level for recursive generic divisions (though it would be an easy
enhancement to add), and one of the reasons we adopted numbered
division elements for the Docbook DTD was so that an editor working
in plain text would have some idea what was going on when he
encountered </sect></sect></sect>.

Given that design decision, we had to make some accomodation to actaul
usage, and you may find it interesting or at least profitable to consider
that we had to add Renderas attributes to the section titles (to present
sect2's as sect3's, for example), and a Bridgehead element, which is
a sort of wildcard heading without additional contained content.

IBMIDDoc took the approach of recursive generic divisions; I haven't
checked to see if it required similar accomodations.  Anyway, there is
No One Answer, and if the users of EAD have sufficiently various working
environments, no argument from tools will suffice.


       Terry Allen      O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.   [log in to unmask]
Online Publishing Report
Read the February issue online
 "In going on with these experiments, how many pretty systems do we build,
  which we soon find ourselves obliged to destroy?"  -  Benjamin Franklin
 A Davenport Group sponsor