OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

dita message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [dita] "Fragments of DITA content"

You've left off the domain and class attributes. The domain attribute in particular is defined on the topic-level element, and would tell us whether the two paragraphs allowed the same sets of subelements.

Michael Priestley
IBM DITA Architect
SWG Classification Schema PDT Lead

"Paul Prescod" <paul.prescod@blastradius.com>

10/06/2005 07:40 AM

[dita] "Fragments of DITA content"

“The target of a conref must be in a valid DITA topic or DITA map. Fragments of DITA content do not contain enough information on their own to allow the conref processor to determine the validity of a reference to them.”
What is the basis for this statement? Could some describe how the first of these documents contains more conref-processor-relevant information than the second?
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE topic PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DITA Composite//EN" "ditabase.dtd">
<!-- Created with XMetaL 4.6 (http://www.xmetal.com) -->
<topic id="topic_5"><title>Title</title>
<p id="reusable">This is a reuable paragraph.</p></body></topic>
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE p PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DITA Composite//EN" "ditabase.dtd">
<!-- Created with XMetaL 4.6 (http://www.xmetal.com) -->
<p id="reusable">This is a reuable paragraph.</p>
Perhaps the spec could be clearer if it were explicit about what information the latter lacks.
As a best practice I actually prefer the former. The title element makes it easier to find the fragment. But a rationale based upon information management best practice is different than one based upon the needs of a conref processor.
 Paul Prescod

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]