dita message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] figgroup: whither <data>?
- From: Michael Priestley <mpriestl@ca.ibm.com>
- To: Deborah_Pickett@moldflow.com
- Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 11:16:53 -0500
OK if we defer to 1.2? I'm wary of touching
the DTDs/Schemas at this stage for 1.1.
Michael Priestley
IBM DITA Architect and Classification Schema PDT Lead
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25
Deborah_Pickett@moldflow.com
01/18/2007 09:36 PM
|
To
| dita@lists.oasis-open.org
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| [dita] figgroup: whither <data>? |
|
This looks like an oversight...
The content model for figgroup is just enough to allow for the one specialization
of it that DITA ships with: syntax diagrams.
<!ELEMENT figgroup ((%title;)?,
(%figgroup; | %xref; | %fn; | %ph; |
%keyword;)* )
>
Conspicuously missing from that list are state, term, data and foreign
(perhaps also boolean, indexterm and foreign). Granted, these could
be wrapped in a ph, but the extra level of wrapping isn't always sensible
in the context of a specialization.
I'd like to see at least the four basic elements state, term, data and
foreign included into figgroup's content model, befitting its role as a
base for specializations.
--
Deborah Pickett
Deborah_Pickett@moldflow.com
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]