[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] History Question: Why does <data> not include <cite>?
Hi, Bruce:
Not the extreme position but the observation about primary use:
* Content tends to be a flow with nested annotations (division, block, phrase, term, etc) and tends to be formatted for reading.
* A metadata property (like other data) tends to be a data structure over atomic values and tends to enable operations on the content.
I agree that the general tendency is only that -- there are many hybrids and gray areas for content and data such as a flow that has a detailed structure embedding atomic values (witness API Reference) or a metadata value that consists of a brief mixed content (witness <publisher>).
The distinction would be academic without the fallback to general processing. If the disclaimer specializes a footnote on the body, it will get formatted by default. By contrast, if it specializes <data> in the prolog, it will get ignored silently by default (because there's no known processing for a property with no semantics).
Anyway, that's my understanding of the TC's original consensus around the <data> element, which of course may have evolved (toward the fittest).
Erik Hennum
ehennum@us.ibm.com
"Bruce Nevin (bnevin)" <bnevin@cisco.com> wrote on 09/04/2009 09:51:10 AM:
>
> Is your suggestion that metadata is used for processing and content
> is used for reading? To put it in more extreme terms, that
> processing is the only appropriate use of metadata and reading is
> the only appropriate use of content?
>
> From: Erik Hennum [mailto:ehennum@us.ibm.com]
>
> ... maybe there's a distinction between metadata and secondary
> flows depending on whether the primary use is processing or reading?
> To try to impose some clarity on the gray area between data
> structures and documents.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]