[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Elaboration of current "13059-like" proposals
After some conversations about the various DITA 1.3 proposals that
relate to conditional processing, cascades, filtering on branches,
etc., I've come to see a need to organize the discussion a bit.
Robert's notes on 13059 indicate that "if needed during proposal
review, may want to break apart into two issues (overriding cascade
+ filtering within a branch)". In fact, there are several fairly separate threads that could each merit its own omnibus proposal under what we might call a "conditional processing theme" for DITA 1.3. I'd like to suggest this organization of concerns now so that we can make sure that at least one designated proposal properly represents each set of related requirements. Narrowing the issues down to a few high-level names might also help with the perception of feature creep. These categories also suggest clear topic headings for discussing these additions to DITA 1.3. 1. "Overriding default cascading rules for metadata." This is a suggested title for #13059-accepted as the omnibus proposal for this clearly understood requirement. Document both the PTC and IBM implementation suggestions so that we can collectively advise on a best path forward. Move the "different filtering conditions" discussion in 13059 to a different proposal. Directly related proposals under this single theme are:
5. "Specialize a DITA topic to represent DITAVAL semantics." This is a new proposal (not on the list yet) suggested by Seth Park that would enable the use of standard DITA conref/keyref and other processing features to enable richer enabling of many of the previous processing requirements. A prolog domain, for example, could help in the rationalized metadata/property attribute naming debacle. Standard behaviors would enable the proposals to utilize Subjectschemes and other organizing/addressing strategies for associating conditional rules to branches of a map. I'll wait on framing discussions before putting this particular item into the list. Topic or domain? or put the addressing features into DITAval? Using topics would actually enable using common authoring infrastructure for making updates, managing as a standard CMS component, etc.. I tend to see some advantages the more I think about it. -- "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"
--T.S. Eliot
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]