Issue summary for architectural spec from Eliot's notes

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

Eliot, here's my attempt to summarize
architectural spec issues from your series of notes over the last week.
Please let me know if I've missed something.

Class attribute syntax
- class attribute syntax mentions "module
package" but doesn't define it

current text:
Each value has two parts: the
first part identifies a module package, for example a topic type or domain
package name, and the second part (after a / ) identifies an element type.
Structural names are taken from the root element for the topic type or
map type. Domain names are defined in the domain package. 

proposed text:
Each value has two parts: the
first part identifies a specialization module, for example a topic type
or domain name, and the second part (after a / ) identifies an element
type. Structural names are taken from the root element for the topic type
or map type. Domain names are defined in the domain module.

Limits of specialization >
Map from customized document type to DITA
- current text implies that element
renaming cannot be done through specializaton - needs to be clearer

current text:
While specialization can be used
to adapt document types for many 
different authoring purposes,
there are some authoring requirements that 
cannot be met through specialization
- particularly splitting or 
renaming attributes, and simple
renaming of elements.

proposed text (making clearer
what "simple renaming" meant):
While specialization can be used
to adapt document types for many 
different authoring purposes,
there are some authoring requirements that 
cannot be met through specialization,
in particular, splitting or 
renaming attributes, or renaming
elements through specialization without also specializing their containers.

Limits of specialization >
Customized subset document types for authoring
- current text confuses compliance
and conformance, reason for limitation unclear

current text:
Customized subset document types
are not compliant with the DITA 
standard, and may not be supported
by standards-compliant tools.

proposed text:
Customized subset document types
are not conformant with the DITA 
standard, and may not be supported
by standards-conformant tools.
For example, if you customize
document types to remove the <xref> element, 
you may not be able to use off-the-shelf
DITA editors to create your content.
 

Michael Priestley
IBM DITA Architect and Classification Schema PDT Lead
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25