I was thinking the same thing. I’m not sure the prefix is needed at all.
DocBook uses the <tag> element with a specific set of class attributes to describe it:
https://tdg.docbook.org/tdg/5.2/tag.html
Perhaps <element>, <attribute>, <namespace>, <process-instruct> still provide enough semantic distinction?
Thanks and best regards,
--Scott
Voting member:
Boeing Data Standards Technical Advisory Board
OASIS DocBook TC (Secretary), Publishers SC (Chair)
OASIS DITA TC, Tech Comm SC, LwDITA SC, Learning Content SC (Secretary)
OASIS DITA Adoption TC
OASIS Augmented Reality in Information Products (ARIP) TC
Scott Hudson
Content Strategist, Digital Aviation Learning and Development
Jeppesen, A Boeing Company
55 Inverness Drive East
Englewood, CO 80112
This document contains only administrative, uncontrolled data under U.S. International Traffic in Arms Regulations.
From:
<dita@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Chris Nitchie <chris.nitchie@oberontech.com>
Date: Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 8:33 AM
To: Eliot Kimber <ekimber@contrext.com>, Jang <jang@jang.nl>, DITA Technical Committee <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: Re: [dita] Question about xml mention domain
Do the elements need a prefix? I’ve used <xmlelement> and <xmlatt> to describe elements and attributes in markup languages that aren’t XML – usually HTML, but also things like Apache Freemarker directives.
I think <element> and <attribute> are probably too generic, but I’d prefer names that weren’t bound so tightly to XML.
Chris
From:
<dita@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Eliot Kimber <ekimber@contrext.com>
Date: Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 10:20 AM
To: Jang <jang@jang.nl>, DITA Technical Committee <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: Re: [dita] Question about xml mention domain
Hmm, the XML spec does seem to be clear:
“Names beginning with the string "xml", or with any string which would match
(('X'|'x') ('M'|'m') ('L'|'l')), are reserved for standardization in this or future versions of this specification.”
https://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#sec-well-formed
So the element types “xmlelement”, “xmlatt”, “xmlnsname”, and “xmlpi” would appear to be technically non-conforming. However, I find it interesting that no-one (myself included, who certainly should have remembered
this aspect of the XML spec since I was a member of the XML Working Group) and no XML parser has ever flagged this, so it’s clearly not enforced. Likewise, with the advent of namespaces, the need to reserve local names is largely removed so the actual practical
value of this aspect of the XML spec is minimal.
That said, it would probably be appropriate to correct this in DITA 2.0. An easy fix would be to replace “xml” with a domain-specific prefix, e.g. “xd”, and add that prefix to the other element type names in the
domain.
But since it clearly causes no actual practical problems as far as we know, I don’t see a need to do anything for DITA 1.x.
Cheers,
E.
--
Eliot Kimber
http://contrext.com
From:
<dita@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Jang Graat <jang@jang.nl>
Date: Tuesday, June 5, 2018 at 8:58 AM
To: DITA Technical Committee <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] Question about xml mention domain
After putting a picture of my self-designed <XMLennial/> T-shirt on FB, it was brought to my attention that this element name is invalid, as it starts with “xml”. I checked this on W3schools and the remark seems
to be correct, unless there have been changes to the standard or its interpretation. Any tag name is legal except when it starts with either ‘xml’, ‘XML’, ‘html’ or ‘HTML’.
What does this mean for the tag names in the XML mention domain? If these are illegal against the XML syntax we have a problem, which would have to be corrected for DITA 2.0.
Kind regards
Jang F.M. Graat
Smart Information Design
Amsterdam, Netherlands
Cell: +31 646 854 996