[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] DITA Proposed Feature: Extensibility of DITA through new attributes
Paul Prescod wrote: > Of your six potential requirement I only intended to deal with "1.". > > With respect to 2: I see no reason to ALLOW a type to DISALLOW further > extension by its sub-types. It feels like extra work to no benefit. Within an enterprise you may want to disallow further specialization of a set of types. That is, one key benefit of specialization is that it can be *controlled*. Thus it follows that you should have the option of disallowing it, as well as allowing it. I realize that this is probably a fairly uncommon case, but I suggest it for completeness. > Similarly, for 3: I don't think that DITA really has a notion of > instance attributes and I don't see a strong argument for it. There is an at least implicit distinction between DITA-defined attributes and all other attributes. This ability would be analogous to the ability to indicate whether or not attributes must be qualified in an XSD schema. For example, to avoid confusion you want to require that any non-DITA-defined attributes used in your specialized documents be qualified, so as it to make it extra clear that these attributes are not DITA-defined. This is recognition of the fundamental problem of recognition posed by the use of the no-namespace namespace--namely, you have no reliable, general way to tell what application the attributes correspond to. Thus it seems like it might be useful to disallow the confusion by requiring non-DITA-defined attributes to be qualified. Cheers, E. -- W. Eliot Kimber Professional Services Innodata Isogen 9390 Research Blvd, #410 Austin, TX 78759 (512) 372-8155 ekimber@innodata-isogen.com www.innodata-isogen.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]