[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] Does <data> need @href?
Your use cases are valid. But I think both are narrow enough that one should use full DITA to meet these requirements, even in the presence of a LwDITA alternative.
I take this position because of my perception that the "Lightweight" portion of Lightweight DITA is at general risk from feature creep.
On 3/31/17 8:46 AM, Rob Hanna wrote:
In my opinion, the @href is quite useful as the semantic that states what the data’s @name and @value applies to. It can apply to an external or internal resource. For example
- To relate a topic to an external resource for pulling in the latest pricing for a widget
- @name = “msrp”
- @value = “widget_canada”
- @href = "" href="http://widgetRUS.salesforce.com/pricelist" target="_blank">http://widgetRUS.salesforce.
- To relate a piece of data to an element within the topic itself
- @name = “correction”
- @value = “Changed the trade name used for the Widget sold in Canada”
- @href = "">012345”
Arguably, the @href value can be inserted using a nested data element. Still I believe that the semantic relevance of @href in data is very useful.
Gently pushing back on this ... if "is it in DITA 1.3?" were the test for inclusion in Lw-DITA, well ...
What can an @href attribute accomplish that @name/@value cannot? I acknowledge that @href has processing implications in full DITA. If that's the driving requirement here, I can accept that. But (generally), if one can meet a requirement in Lw-DITA with more general/extensible markup (in this case, @name/@value), I would favor punting the more specific markup.