Re: [dita] Question about domains attribute

[Robert D Anderson <robander@us.ibm.com>]

Ah, of course. That said - I didn't think that the base topic or map had domain tokens? They do not appear in the DITA 1.3 document types (I'm looking at base topic and base map, which use the fewest domains). So if I want a new shell for base map -- what value is legal or required for @domains in DITA 1.* on the <map> element, when using no specializaations of any kind, and using no constraints?

For the case that was causing me trouble - the structural specialization and shell DTD were created back in the days of DITA 1.1, so we did not have a structural domain token. I can create that token now and bypass the error. Still, it's not an absolute requirement - as you say, it's strongly urged, but not a MUST for exactly this reason - I believe my shell DTD was valid in DITA 1.1, and should remain valid in 1.2 and 1.3.

Robert D Anderson
IBM Authoring Tools Development
Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit (http://dita-ot.sourceforge.net/)

Eliot Kimber <ekimber@contrext.com> wrote on 10/03/2014 14:33:02:

> From: Eliot Kimber <ekimber@contrext.com>
> To: Robert D Anderson/Rochester/IBM@IBMUS, DITA TC <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Date: 10/03/2014 14:33
> Subject: Re: [dita] Question about domains attribute
>
> Starting with DITA 1.2 we strongly urged @domains to list all structural
> types as well as domains, so the minimum @domains value should be "(topic
> topic)" or "(map map)" in the case where you have no domains integrated.
>
> Cheers,
>
> E.
> —————
> Eliot Kimber, Owner
> Contrext, LLC
> http://contrext.com
>
>
>
>
> On 10/3/14, 2:21 PM, "Robert D Anderson" <robander@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> >The DITA spec is pretty clear that structural specializations need to
> >declare @domains on the root element (specialization of map or topic),
> >and that this attribute must describe the domains used in a given
> >document type shell. The spec says of this attribute: "...the @domains
> >attribute, whose value is a sequence of parenthesized module ancestry
> >specifications. "
> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.2/os/spec/archSpec/domainsatt.html
> >
> >The question is - what about if I have a document type shell with no
> >domains? I've got a very simple map specialization - mostly a title,
> >metadata, and very limited references to other maps. There is no need for
> >any domains. I've declared the attribute for my root element, but in my
> >DTD file the attribute is set to the empty string (""). This would not
> >appear to comply with the language above, because the empty string is not
> >a sequence of parenthesized modules. Is it correct to set this to the
> >empty string? I've got a tool that reports an error here because @domains
> >does not match the current definition. I can get around the error by
> >setting a value like "none" or "(none)" but those clearly do not comply
> >either.
> >
> >So - what is the correct value for @domains in a document type shell that
> >does not use any domains?
> >
> >Robert D Anderson
> >IBM Authoring Tools Development
> >Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit (http://dita-ot.sourceforge.net/)
>
>