[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] Notes in Lightweight DITA
Agreed on Option #1 for the reasons Scott has already outlined.
-
Keith Schengili-Roberts
DITA Information Architect / DITA Specialist
IXIASOFT
825 Querbes, Suite 200, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H2V 3X1
tel + 1 514
279-4942 / toll free + 1 877 279-4942
Interested in attending? Visit our event website for
more information.
From: dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org <dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Scott Hudson <scott.hudson@jeppesen.com>
Sent: Friday, May 6, 2016 3:52:23 PM To: Michael Priestley; dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [dita-lightweight-dita] Notes in Lightweight DITA I vote Option 1 for consistency in authoring between full and lightweight. I think the other options differ too much from full DITA and could lead to potential
confusion. Close second for Option 2, as I could see potential use for hazard-statements where the hazard symbol could be contained in a dt and the body of the hazard statement
in the dd. I still prefer Option 1 though. Thanks and best regards, --Scott Scott Hudson Training & Documentation Jeppesen
|
Digital Aviation | Boeing
From: dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Michael Priestley We discussed a number of options in our last SC call - feedback/suggestions/votes needed to help us move forward. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]