Re: [dita] Re: Comparison between DITA and S1000D

[john_hunt@us.ibm.com]

Erik said:
<<More generally, the DITA TC
should recommend as a preferred approach that human-readable topic content
be modelled on a single type hierarchy.  Of course, other kinds of
content (for instance, invoice data) would be a distinct type hierarchy.>>

Yes, I agree. If there's potential to
S1000D in adopting the DITA architecture, then the DITA-ized S1000D would
develop a type hierarchy with a base type. The question then becomes, why
not start with the DITA base type? If not the DITA base type, then what's
needed in the DITA base type to make it work?

The advantages that ensue from a common
base type are significant. It's this "specialization with a fallback"
that enables much of the power of DITA's topic-based reuse model, and which
distinguishes it from other approaches. It's what makes it possible to
say that with DITA, it's possible to exchange, integrate, and reuse content
across disparate information domains, such as IT, pharmeceutical, military,
aviation, telecommunications, etc. This is one key, clear advantage DITA
brings to the table. I'd hesitate to weaken it by splitting the DITA architecture
model from its typing hierarchy and the common base it provides.

John  
-----------------------------------------------------
John Hunt
IBM DITA Learning Architect 
Lotus User Assistance Architect
IBM Software Group/Lotus Software
1 Rogers Street, Cambridge, MA
john_hunt@us.ibm.com