[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] Formal Imagemaps
Hi Gershon - you're probably aware of this, but I wanted to point out that it's not technically legal to specialize imagemap to allow a title (you can't add an item that's not allowed in the original). If you share the topics with any other users, they won't be able to process them. Another option is to specialize a section to <fullimagemap> or some better name. It can require one title and one imagemap. This would need to be a specialization of the Utilities Domain, in order for it to legally use the imagemap element. Maybe this is already what you're talking about. :-) On the related subject of requiring titles in tables or figures - you can create domain specializations of these elements and require a title (create formaltable and formalfig). Some editors would then allow you to hide the original table and fig elements. This is not a great or easy solution, but is another possibility if your editor will not let you require the title in <table>. I know of some user groups that wanted to enforce constraints like this by requiring the shortdesc element. They added an override to their processing pipeline, so that users were warned when the shortdesc was missing. Again, not ideal, because it delays the enforcement, but you might want to use it as an additional check. One of the items already on the plate for 1.2 is "Constraints - restriction without specialization (Issue #34) " - I'm pretty sure it is meant to address this specific issue. Erik may wish to speak up to clarify that. (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/14936/Issue34.html) Robert D Anderson IBM Authoring Tools Development Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit (507) 253-8787, T/L 553-8787 "Gershon L Joseph" <gershon@tech-tav To .com> Robert D Anderson/Rochester/IBM@IBMUS, 05/10/2006 11:11 <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> AM cc Subject Please respond to RE: [dita] Formal Imagemaps <gershon@tech-tav .com> Thanks Robert for this information. I'll just specialize <imagemap> then. I'll make a note to add this to our future features list. Best Regards, Gershon -----Original Message----- From: Robert D Anderson [mailto:robander@us.ibm.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:49 PM To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [dita] Formal Imagemaps Hi Gershon - the problem is that imagemap is specialized from the <fig> element, and fig does not allow fig as a child. So, fig cannot legally allow imagemap either. This does mean that the imagemap could legally include a title element on its own, but it's not part of the specification - you could probably bring that up as a 1.2 or 1.3 enhancement. Robert D Anderson IBM Authoring Tools Development Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit (507) 253-8787, T/L 553-8787 "Gershon L Joseph" <gershon@tech-tav To .com> <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> cc 05/10/2006 10:45 AM Subject [dita] Formal Imagemaps Please respond to <gershon@tech-tav .com> One of my clients requires <imagemap> to have a caption. For now, I'll specialize <fig> by adding <imagemap> as an optional child, but I was wondering what the rational was for not making <imagemap> available in <fig>? PS. I'm not asking for this to be done in DITA 1.1. I just want to understand the thinking at the time in case I'm missing something here... Best Regards, Gershon --- Gershon L Joseph Member, OASIS DITA and DocBook Technical Committees Director of Technology and Single Sourcing Tech-Tav Documentation Ltd. office: +972-8-974-1569 mobile: +972-57-314-1170 http://www.tech-tav.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]