[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] Prototype DITA 1.1 DTDs
The doctype for the OASIS approved version will have /OASIS/ versus /IBM/
to differentiate the unversioned doctype.
Regards,
--
Don Day
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
IBM Lead DITA Architect
Email: dond@us.ibm.com
11501 Burnet Rd. MS9033E015, Austin TX 78758
Phone: +1 512-838-8550
T/L: 678-8550
"Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"
--T.S. Eliot
Scott Hudson
<scottys.log@gmai
l.com> To
Paul Prescod
06/21/2006 03:28 <paul.prescod@xmetal.com>
PM cc
"Rodolfo M. Raya"
<rmraya@heartsome.net>, Robert D
Anderson/Rochester/IBM@IBMUS,
dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject
Re: [dita] Prototype DITA 1.1 DTDs
I realize that bookmap hasn't been official until 1.1, but there have
been big changes in that model from the demo. Content valid against one
version will not against the other.
So far, the biggest issue I've seen is with title, but there may be
others. The different public identifiers would alleviate any concerns
over compatibility, because you know what version you are validating
against.
DocBook's naming and versioning for v5.0 is documented here for those
curious:
http://www.docbook.org/docs/howto/#cust-naming
Best regards,
--Scott
.Paul Prescod wrote:
> To summarize: the reason you would like version-dependent public
> identifiers is because you are nervous that DITA 1.1 will not be 100%
> backwards compatible with DITA 1.0. Is that right? If it turned out to
> be 100% backwards compatible then you would not mind installing DITA
> 1.1 for your translators to use with DITA 1.0 and 1.1 documents.
>
> Paul Prescod
>
--
(See attached file: scottys.log.vcf)
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]