Re: [dita] otherprops syntax - should we specify?

[Michael Priestley <mpriestl@ca.ibm.com>]

OK, here's my proposal, based on France's
suggestion:

--------------
otherprops:
        Can
take a list of blank-delimited values like the other metadata attributes,
or can take labelled groups of values. A labelled group consists of a string
value followed by an open parenthesis followed by one or more blank-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 useful when an information set requires two or more
additional metadata axes. A process can detect which format is in use by
the presence of parentheses in the attribute.

Example, simple format:
<codeblock otherprops="java
cpp">

Example, grouped format:
<codeblock otherprops="proglang(java
cpp) commentformat(javadoc html)">
-----------------


Michael Priestley
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
Dept PRG IBM Canada  phone: 416-915-8262
Toronto Information Development

Christopher Wong <cwong@idiominc.com>

01/14/2005 04:51 PM

To	DITA TC list <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	Re: [dita] otherprops syntax - should we specify?

Michael Priestley wrote:
Just wanted to start the discussion
on the list. For background, take a look at the conditional processing
topic in the current draft of the spec. 

It doesn't look like we have much movement, decision-wise,
on this topic. Maybe we would have a decision if we had something to decide
on. Would it help if someone like Michael post an otherprops spec proposal
and sample XML so some people can start to form some yea-or-nay opinions?

Chris