[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] Attribute Generalization
Although it would make it more difficult to support DITA, I have a conflicting urge, which is to allow even more expressive power ... props="proglanguage(Java) audience(CompanyA(student) CompanyB(teacher))" A compromise would be to put declarations of attributes into the props attribute, and then have processors that support extensibility look in those attributes for the values. Bruce -----Original Message----- From: Paul Prescod [mailto:paul.prescod@blastradius.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 9:35 AM To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [dita] Attribute Generalization I think that an important undiscussed aspect of this proposal is that formalizes a syntax for metadata declaration that is not compatible with software that does not specifically recognize DITA. It will not be easy to "configure" existing content management, rendering or authoring software to recognize attributes like this: props="proglanguage(Java) audience(student teacher)" I presume that these attributes will need to be recognized and manipulated by tools other than the Java coe in the DITA toolkit. This will be difficult with the (relatively) complicated syntax described. I think that there is a better solution. We should just accept that the result of generalization does not necessarily adhere strictly to the base DTD. Extra attributes in the generalized content should just be treated by processing software (not validators) as harmless extra information. Validators should look at a view of the information with the extra attributes just missing. Paul Prescod
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]