Re: [dita] my opinion of some DITA 1.2 proposals

[Erik Hennum <ehennum@us.ibm.com>]

Hi, Paul:

Regarding proposals 12008 and 12010, isn't it premature to move
to general summaries without discussing the proposed specifics?

What parts of the proposals do you find complex? Maybe we can
improve on those parts.

Both proposals solve real problems created by the current limitations
of DITA specialization.

Proposal 12008 adds support for content model restrictions and selective
domain extension. These are things that adopters have been requesting
from the earliest days (please see the cited correspondence and examples).
In fact, many people are surprised that document types with content model
restrictions or selective domain extension can no longer be called
conformant DITA.

Proposal 12008 defines the set of customizations that don't invalidate
interoperability and gives the designer a way to declare those
customizations so processors can recognize interoperable content.

The proposal would be of particular use for the TC in refactoring
the task topic to become more flexibile while preserving the existing
restrictions via a constraint.

Proposal 12010 removes a severe design limitation that became
obvious during creation of the API Reference specialization: sharing
vocabulary across specific content models in different topics isn't
allowed.

Regarding proposal 12031, can we wait for the full design rather than
prejudge?


Thanks,


Erik Hennum
ehennum@us.ibm.com


"Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com> wrote on 09/11/2007 06:54:16 AM:

> The following three are complicated, esoteric, and, in
> my opinion, have more cost then benefit in terms of
> complicating the specification itself, the task of
> learning about DITA, and the ongoing use of DITA, to
> say nothing of the implementation:
>
> 12008 Constraints - restriction without specialization
> 12010 Domain and topic integration
> 12031 Controlled values / taxonomies