Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] Full DITA compatibility

["Noz Urbina" <noz.urbina@urbinaconsulting.com>]

> (I'd started talking about navigation as an illustration of the intent of
> <section>. While you *could* get section titles into navigation, it seems
> like going against the grain, and you'd still be prevented from nesting
> sections.)

I think we're having a <section>/section confusion again. I wasn't talking
about <section> I was talking about topics used as sections.

> that the tradeoff of keeping child
> topics in the same storage object is that you have to edit the CMS object
> / file to reorder them. If you're doing it for a specific output context
> only (re-ordering for a particular audience segment or product, perhaps),
> it means duplicating the object in some way. When each topic is a separate
> storage object, you can re-order topics in a specific map for that output
> context.

Or creating a map that points to the nested topics from a different
hierarchy of topicref elements. Although we're maybe turning that off? And
even if not, then I think we're ok. People can either split them up when
they decide it's necessary, or conref them into a new topic in a different
order and then point the new map to the new conref'ing topic.