Re: [dita] conref source and target [was: Why There are Constraintson Conref]

[ekimber <ekimber@reallysi.com>]

On 10/1/09 3:16 PM, "Bruce Nevin (bnevin)" <bnevin@cisco.com> wrote:

> Gotta appreciate the sense of humor!
>  
> But the locus of mischief isn't actually at the conref-bearing element,
> is it?
>  
> Maybe too verbose as handy labels, but we are talking about the
> conref-bearing element and the content-bearing element.

I had to read that twice to realize that "conref-bearing" and
"content-bearing" were different words. "r" and "f" and "t" are too similar
in shape...

Cheers,

E.

----
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>