RE: [dita] ITEM: Cross-references to Topicheads and Implicit Title-only Topics

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

OK, then in the interest of being able to close this issue
quickly on next week's telcon, could you please produce
a revision of your proposal (without "implicit title-only"
in the subject) that specifies just the suggested changes
to the dita 1.2 language reference for TC approval?

thanks,

paul 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eliot Kimber [mailto:ekimber@reallysi.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, 2009 May 05 16:13
> To: Grosso, Paul; dita
> Subject: Re: [dita] ITEM: Cross-references to Topicheads and 
> Implicit Title-only Topics
> 
> On 5/5/09 3:48 PM, "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com> wrote:
> 
> > After review, Jeff and I are generally okay with this,
> > but if we're planning to approve something at next week's
> > telcon, we need to be sure we know what we're approving.
> > In most cases, Eliot's email does do that, but not in all.
> > 
> > [Note, despite the subject--which suffers from legacy--this
> > proposal is just about cross-references to topicheads.  It
> > does not mention/address implicit title-only topics.]
> > 
> > More detailed "editorial" comments below (nothing technical).
> 
> Sorry for the confusion--my haste to get something to the TC 
> in advance of
> today's meeting.
>  
> 
> >> 4. Under "data":
> >> 
> >> - href= is allowed but the current spec doesn't say what it
> >> means to specify
> >> href= on data. Data-about mentions that href= on data
> >> specifies the object
> >> of the data. So clearly we need to say something to that
> >> effect under data.
> > 
> > Since no specific change has been suggested, I'm assuming this
> > is just a comment in passing.  Unless in the future some specific
> > change is suggested, this is a no-op, and I'll assume any vote
> > next week will not include anything on this.
> 
> I think I need to propose specific language for data:
> 
> 4. Add new third paragraph:
> 
> Use the href attribute to point to the effective value of the 
> <data> element
> (the object of the <data>). When the direct target of the 
> href attribute is
> a topicref element, processors may choose to treat either the 
> topicref or
> its ultimate target as the object of the <data> element.
> 
> [WEK: I think I've understood the intent of href= on <data> 
> correctly in
> this proposal. If not, then we need to agree as a TC what the 
> intent is.]
> 
> >> 5. data-about
> >> 
> >> I think the text under href, proposed above, is sufficient
> >> since it's not a
> >> navigation relationship but an annotation relationship.
> > 
> > Another no-op comment.
> 
> Yes. Item 5 is not a proposal.
>  
> >> 7. lq
> >> 
> >> Same as data-about--let href text serve, since use of 
> href= on lq is
> >> effectively deprecated by the existence of longquoteref
> > 
> > Another no-op comment.
> 
> Correct--also not a proposal.
>  
> 
> > I'm assuming there is no significance to #10 being missing.
> 
> Correct, no significance.
>  
> > We're okay with the first #12.
> > 
> > I'm assuming there is no significance to having two #12's.
> 
> Cut and paste error.
>  
> Cheers,
> 
> Eliot
> ----
> Eliot Kimber | Senior Solutions Architect | Really Strategies, Inc.
> email:  ekimber@reallysi.com <mailto:ekimber@reallysi.com>
> office: 610.631.6770 | cell: 512.554.9368
> 2570 Boulevard of the Generals | Suite 213 | Audubon, PA 19403
> www.reallysi.com <http://www.reallysi.com>  | http://blog.reallysi.com
> <http://blog.reallysi.com> | www.rsuitecms.com 
> <http://www.rsuitecms.com> 
> 
>