OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

dita message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [dita] Question cropping up as a result of constraints review


The language specific in the discussion of structural constraints is clear
that a single constraint module can constrain multiple elements and that
is definitely the intent of the spec. There is no other interpretation
that makes practical sense as the spec also says that there can be at most
one constraint module for a given vocabulary module.

I think the confusion might come from the language for the names of
structural constraint modules, which talk about the tagname the constraint
relates to. For a constraint module that constrains multiple element types
within the structural module, the filename should refer to the structural
type (e.g, topic, concept, task). The naming rules are a little bit weak,
as we've discussed. The intent of the naming rules is that the name of the
constraint module makes it clear what module the constraint applies to and
the general nature or purpose of the constraint.

Cheers,

E.
—————
Eliot Kimber, Owner
Contrext, LLC
http://contrext.com




On 1/13/15, 9:26 AM, "Kristen James Eberlein"
<kris@eberleinconsulting.com> wrote:

>
>  
>
>    
>  
>  
>    A fairly significant question has cropped up as result of the
>    constraints review. I polled four TC members yesterday and posed the
>    following question:
>    
>    "Off the top of your head, for a non-domain constraint module, which
>    of the following is true?
>    
>      
>* A constraint module can restrict only a single element.
>      
>* A constraint module can restrict only a group of elements that
>        are defined in the same .mod file.
>    
>
>    The TC members were equally split on what is the correct answer
>      to the question.
>    
>    I went to the original proposal from Erik Hennum, and confirmed
>      that this was indeed ambiguous in both the DITA 1.2 proposal and
>      the DITA 1.2 spec.
>    
>    We do need to settle this ...
>    
>    -- 
>      Best,
>      Kris
>      
>      Kristen James Eberlein
>      Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
>      Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
>      www.eberleinconsulting.com <http://www.eberleinconsulting.com>
>      +1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)
>      
>    
>  
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>




[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]