[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] Keywords in DITA
Dana,
I think your conclusion is quite accurate. I had expected
"keyword" to mean the DocBook sense not a programming language
item.
JoAnn JoAnn T. Hackos, PhD From: Dana Spradley [mailto:dana.spradley@oracle.com] Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 11:05 AM To: Dana Spradley Cc: JoAnn Hackos; Rob Frankland; Paul Prescod; Don Day; dita@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [dita] Keywords in DITA In fact, it seems to me this whole discussion was provoked by a bad definition for <keyword> in the language spec, which defined it as a keyword in the technical programming sense, while from the <keywords> definition you would have expected it to be defined as in DocBook. We could solve the entire issue by just revising that <keyword> definition to be what <keywords> expects. If people feel there is a need for keywords in the technical sense to migrate beyond the confines of syntax diagrams, then that's a separate issue for the folks working on the Programming Domain vis-a-vis the <kwd> element - which *is* defined as a keyword in the technical programming sense. --Dana Dana Spradley wrote: I agree on the DocBook part, but disagree on the <keyword> in other contexts is more like a word from an API or language clause. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]