Re: [dita] Details in the DITA spec

[Michael Priestley <mpriestl@ca.ibm.com>]

There are some cases (such as behavior
of conref with attributes on the referencing element) where the spec needs
to be updated, other cases (such as behavior of conref with domains) where
the spec already says the right thing.

Where I haven't explicitly suggested
a change to the spec in my response, I'm not convinced a change is needed
(for example checking of recursive conref).



Michael Priestley
IBM DITA Architect
SWG Classification Schema PDT Lead
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com

"Paul Prescod" <paul.prescod@blastradius.com>

10/11/2005 10:53 AM

To	<dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	[dita] Details in the DITA spec

With respect to my questions about conref and it's
semantics: I
appreciate everyone who answered describing what the DITA toolkit does.
I think that knowing what the toolkit is very valuable to me as an
implementer and as a standardizer. 

That said, I think that we all agree that it doesn't really answer the
question of what the standard says or SHOULD say. Therefore I'd like to
re-ask a question I asked on last week's call. Do we have any process
planned for tightening up the 1.1 spec itself, independent of new
features?

 Paul Prescod