[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] Should "warning" be in note type list?
Hi there, I think that the Machine industry subcommittee is putting together a proposal to address the ANSI and ISO notice standards that are not in the DITA spec. Amber -----Original Message----- From: Scott Hudson [mailto:scott.hudson@flatironssolutions.com] Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 4:46 PM To: W. Eliot Kimber Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [dita] Should "warning" be in note type list? I agree. I think it should be added as well. It is an important distinction for many types of documents. Best regards, --Scott W. Eliot Kimber wrote: > I noticed that the "type" attribute of note does not contain "warning" > although it does contain "caution" and "danger". > > Since note/caution/warning is a pretty standard hierarchy of admonition > types [I discovered this because a client's documents have warnings that > are labled "Warning" and I didn't find the word "warning" in the dita > reference] I would think that "warning" should be in the list. > > Note that at least in my experience (for example, with aircraft > maintenance), that there is a distinction between "warning" and "danger" > that is, if I'm remembering correctly, the difference between damage to > equipment (warning) and injury to people (danger). > > However, if the intent is that one of the other keywords is a synonym > for "warning" I think it would be good to mention this in the spec. > > Cheers, > > Eliot
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]