Re: [dita] DITA 1.3 Proposal 13004: Scoped Keys

[Eliot Kimber <ekimber@reallysi.com>]

On 1/23/12 1:53 PM, "Nitchie, Chris" <cnitchie@ptc.com> wrote:


> 6. I considered using 'key space scope' or 'key sub-space' instead of
> 'key scope' in the proposal, but the former is too verbose and the
> latter sounds like something from a science fiction story. I do think it
> makes sense to come up with good terminology here so we can be
> consistent. I think it makes sense to talk about "segmented key spaces,"
> for example.

My point is that there are just key spaces--with this proposal a map or
topicref either establishes a new key space or doesn't.

There's no sense in which the key spaces are "segmented" and subordination
is only interesting during key space construction, not key resolution
(ignoring implementations that might do late-bound inheritance of keys from
parent to child scope-defining element).

In DITA 1.2 a given map tree produced exactly one (possibly empty) key
space. With this proposal a map tree can produce any number of key spaces.

That is, I don't think it's useful to think of the root map as defining a
bunch of related key spaces, I think it's sufficient to think of the root
map as defining a set of otherwise-independent key spaces.

Cheers,

E.
-- 
Eliot Kimber
Senior Solutions Architect
"Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together"
Main: 512.554.9368
www.reallysi.com
www.rsuitecms.com