OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

dita message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [dita] DITAbase for conversion


Title: Re: [dita] DITAbase for conversion

My understanding was that one of the main reasons for the general (looser) task model was as a basis for specialization (since a specialization cannot be more general that its base, so you have to start with a fairly general one).

 

And, if it is used by a customer as a basis for specialization, then what they will want to have in their version of ditabase--for all the reasons we want the stricter task in the TC one--is going to be their (stricter than general) specialization of general task.

 

So having a ditabase with general task will do such users no good.

 

I don't think we should provide such.  It will more likely than not just cause users more problems when they think they can use such a ditabase with their specialized-from-general tasks.

 

paul

 

From: Su-Laine Yeo [mailto:su-laine.yeo@justsystems.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 2009 September 23 16:18
To: DITA TC
Subject: RE: [dita] DITAbase for conversion

 

If I understand things correctly, it is clear to me now that ditabase.dtd must use the stricter task model. Otherwise conrefs that point from tasks to <task> targets within a composite document will immediately be considered invalid by any validation tool that uses DITA 1.2 DTDs. A lot of conrefs created in DITA 1.0 and 1.1 would  be considered invalid by DITA 1.2 processors if we loosen ditabase.dtd.

 

So the only question left is how the need for looser versions of ditabase should be filled: By the DITA TC, by individual implementers of DITA, or something in-between. I think the right answer depends on how often a looser version would be needed. If the need is very common then I think the TC should provide it. I don’t have data indicating that the need is very common. Does anyone else?

 

Regards,

Su-Laine

 

 

Su-Laine Yeo
Interaction Design Specialist

JustSystems Canada, Inc.
Office: 778-327-6356
syeo@justsystems.com

www.justsystems.com

 

 

 

 

From: Joann Hackos [mailto:joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 1:59 PM
To: Michael Priestley; rob@ascan.ca; Hal Trent; Frank Miller
Cc: DITA TC; Eliot Kimber; Kristen Eberlein
Subject: Re: [dita] DITAbase for conversion

 

HI All,
I concur with Michael’s statement. It don’t want to rely upon the authors (inhouse, vendors, around the world) remembering what is not allowed. The constraints are designed to keep the authoring consistent across a wide variety of knowledge and experience. So I would not use any “general” model where I wanted constraints. Of course, I might want a different set of constraints that is currently available in the current constrained task.

I think the arch spec needs to make this relationship very, very clear to everyone. The backwards compatibility is a huge problem if people start using “general” task without knowing its consequences. It’s presence under the name “task” in an editor makes the possibility of serious problems enormous for organizations.

I intend to discuss it in the technical content sections of the arch spec once the 2nd review is complete. I hope its a major discussion under the constraint mechanism. This needs to come with huge warnings.

JoAnn


On 9/23/09 9:28 AM, "Michael Priestley" <mpriestl@ca.ibm.com> wrote:


Hi Rob,

While it is true that the conrefs would work if an organization switched wholesale from the current constrained task to a looser model, that's not backwards compatibility - that's saying that if someone wants to preserve their current reuse strategy they should throw out their content guidelines.

Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
Lead IBM DITA Architect
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25 <http://dita.xml.org/blog/25>


From: "Rob Hanna" <rob@ascan.ca>
To: "'ekimber'" <ekimber@reallysi.com>, "'Kristen James Eberlein'" <keberlein@pobox.com>, "'JoAnn Hackos'" <joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com>
Cc: "'dita'" <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: 09/23/2009 10:57 AM
Subject: RE: [dita] DITAbase for conversion





I understand the compatibility problems between constrained and
unconstrained conrefs. It shouldn't present a problem in environments where
DITA 1.1 DTDs are upgraded to DITA 1.2 DTDs with the unconstrained task
model. It is not a backward compatibility issue. Technically, the older DITA
1.1 task topics will also be unconstrained but be written to resemble the
constrained task model.

Cheers,
Rob

-----Original Message-----
From: ekimber [mailto:ekimber@reallysi.com
<mailto:ekimber@reallysi.com> ]
Sent: September 23, 2009 10:28 AM
To: rob@ascan.ca; Kristen James Eberlein; 'JoAnn Hackos'
Cc: dita
Subject: Re: [dita] DITAbase for conversion

On 9/23/09 9:22 AM, "Rob Hanna" <rob@ascan.ca> wrote:

> I'm not sure I understand. If content created in DITA 1.0 and DITA 1.1 are
> compatible with the strict, constrained version of task, they should also
be
> valid against the looser, unconstrained version as well. I don't see a
> backward compatibility issue here. Or am I missing something?

A constrained task cannot conref from an unconstrained task.

Conref requires that the conref target be at least as constrained (and
compatibly constrained) as the conref source (that is, the document making
the conref link).

Otherwise, you cannot be assured that the conrefed data is valid in the
using context.

Cheers,

Eliot

----
Eliot Kimber | Senior Solutions Architect | Really Strategies, Inc.
email:  ekimber@reallysi.com <mailto: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
<www.reallysi.com> <http://www.reallysi.com <http://www.reallysi.com/> >  | http://blog.reallysi.com <http://blog.reallysi.com/>
<http://blog.reallysi.com <http://blog.reallysi.com/> > | www.rsuitecms.com <www.rsuitecms.com> <http://www.rsuitecms.com <http://www.rsuitecms.com/> >


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
<https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php>



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
<https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php>




[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]