Re: [dita] Why There are Constraints on Conref

["Rob Hanna" <rob@ascan.ca>]

> They might be making content outside
> their environment unusable *by them*
> but they would not be making their
> content unusable to others who use fewer
> constraints.

What if instead of having fewer constraints, they have different constraints? This is not simply a matter of just two task variations. Over time the variations of standard topic types introduced through constraints will grow.

For example, consider one possible scenario I see where this might present a problem:

"Over the course of several years a department's style guide changes several times through reorgs and acquisitions - each time enforced with a different set of constraints introduced. There is no budget to convert the older content. Over time reuse opportunities are lost and content must be duplicated to suit different doc sets written to adhere to separate constraints."

As it stands now, constraints do not deprecate gracefully as would domain specializations. Even substructures within structurally specialized content can generally be reused safely.

This is an issue that can only get more complex over time. In my opinion, processors must be designed to handle the base (or call it general or loose) structures with warnings to ensure seamless exchange of content.

I apologize if I appear to be harping on this. If I'm the only person who sees it this way then I shall try to hold my tongue.

Thank you all for your patience.

Cheers,
Rob Hanna

Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network