RE: [dita] Stan Doherty comments disposition

["Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Priestley [mailto:mpriestl@ca.ibm.com] 
> Sent: Monday, 2007 February 12 19:56
> To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [dita] Stan Doherty comments disposition
> 
> 
> FYI, comments from Stan Doherty and their disposition (just 
> getting them on the list for archiving): 

> > P23f:    Addition? "DITA maps are specific to particular
> >          target output formats whereas topics are (most
> >          often) independent of output. To process/publish
> >          the same content to two output formats, you need
> >          two DITA maps." The current language around
> >          "scalable reuse of content across multiple
> >          contexts" is a bit sqooshy. This gets stated more\
> >          explicitly on P24-L21. 
> 
> This is a stronger statement than I'm comfortable making. 

Yes, way stronger, to the point of being misleading in my
opinion.  Some of us produce tools designed to produce
multiple outputs from the same input using stylesheets.

I wouldn't want us to put anything like this into the spec.

> Most people I know are actually using the same map to produce 
> both print and online output, with only minor variants 
> controlled using attributes. So while the ability to have two 
> different maps for different output formats is valuable, it's 
> not defining. 

paul