Clarify requirements for @otherprops

[Eliot Kimber <ekimber@reallysi.com>]

The current spec says this about @otherprops, in 2.1.3.6:

The attribute can also take labelled groups of values, but this syntax was
deprecated in DITA 1.1 in
favor of attribute specialization. The labelled group syntax is similar to
the generalized attribute syntax
and may cause confusion for processors. A labelled group consists of a
string value followed by an
open parenthesis followed by one or more space-delimited values followed by
a close parenthesis. The
simple format is sufficient when an information set requires only one
additional metadata axis, in
addition to the base metadata attributes of product, platform, and audience.
The full format is similar to
attribute specialization in that it allows two or more additional metadata
axes. For example, a complex
otherprops value list: <codeblock otherprops="proglang(java cpp)
commentformat(javadoc html)">

However, neither this statement, nor the language reference entry indicate
whether @otherprops is processed like @props when the generalized value
syntax is used or whether it's just treated like a string match.

Also, the statement "The labelled[sic] group syntax is similar to the
generalized attribute syntax and may cause confusion for processors." is not
helpful and is inappropriate for a standard.

The spec needs to say either that @otherprops is processed the same was as
@props when the generalized value syntax is used or it needs to say it's a
string value that is matched as any other string value.

The current toolkit treats @otherprops as a string value and that seems to
be the design intent, but it's not clear from the spec what the correct
behavior is.

Cheers,

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