OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

dita message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [dita] figgroup: whither <data>?



But of course.  I don't want to get in the way of pushing 1.1 out the door.  Besides, I may have forgotten one or more elements in my list.

--
Deborah Pickett
Deborah_Pickett@moldflow.com



Michael Priestley <mpriestl@ca.ibm.com>

2007-01-24 03.16

To
Deborah_Pickett@moldflow.com
cc
dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject
Re: [dita] figgroup: whither <data>?






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]