[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] 12026 Specialize glossary entry and definition elements
Hi, Jeff:
I think that's a good design question -- whether it would be more useful to add optional linguistic and semantic elements to the existing specialization or to specialize basic glossary to extend generic elements with linguistic and semantic elements.
Thanks,
Erik Hennum
ehennum@us.ibm.com
"Ogden, Jeff" <jogden@ptc.com>
08/20/2007 08:50 AM |
|
Hi, Paul:
The original design for the glossary specialization includes optional elements for linguistic concerns (the part of speech, etc) and semantic concerns (the scope of the sense, etc). We simplified to cover only publishing concerns in support of book enablement for DITA 1.1; however, that was with the expectation that we would revisit the ancillary concerns in DITA 1.2 so that adopters who need to manage those aspects of their content vocabulary can but others don't have to.
Hoping that clarifies,
Erik Hennum
ehennum@us.ibm.com
"Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com> wrote on 08/15/2007 07:17:28 AM:
> Rereading
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/15140/Issue14.html
> I'm not understanding what this is about and why the
> new glossary stuff we put into DITA 1.1 doesn't suffice.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]