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] Attribute Generalization



I've been corrected re our current use: - at one point our translation process was planned to use it, but it is currently using a different approach, and future use of the capability in the scope of translation is not decided.

Re whether we need a DTD: I think there are three general use cases here:

- if the content is going to be edited by somebody changing the structure, they need the fully specialized DTD/schema
- if the content is going to be edited or modified by a DTD/schema aware process that is not specialization aware, they need the level of DTD/schema they're aware of
- if the content is going to be edited or modified by a non-DTD/schema aware process, then they don't need the DTD/schema at all, they just need normalized output.

I think the middle case is the one I'm concerned about preserving, and I'll try to come up with some more explicit use cases, although not in time for this call.

Michael Priestley
IBM DITA Architect and Classification Schema PDT Lead
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25



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

04/18/2006 10:46 AM

To
Michael Priestley/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
cc
<dita@lists.oasis-open.org>, "Esrig, Bruce \(Bruce\)" <esrig@lucent.com>
Subject
RE: [dita] Attribute Generalization





 


From: Michael Priestley [mailto:mpriestl@ca.ibm.com]
Sent:
Tuesday, April 18, 2006 7:29 AM
To:
Paul Prescod
Cc:
dita@lists.oasis-open.org; Esrig, Bruce (Bruce)
Subject:
RE: [dita] Attribute Generalization



Generalized values go in the props attribute, and roughly correspond to the syntax already described for the otherprops attribute.


Paul, I agree that it is simpler to just ditch the promise (that generalized content can still be processed in a specialized way) than to deliver on the promise.

I didn't say that we should ditch that promise. I said that we should ditch the promise that the result of generalization will always be DTD-valid. A copyright inserting process does not need a DTD. An editor does need a DTD, but it needs the most specialized DTD (and the specialized content) if it is to maintain the validity of the content.
As a reminder, the rationale for specialized processing of generalized content has to do with sharing content between systems and organizations that may include a mix of specialization-aware and specialization-unaware processing. This is not a hypothetical situation, it's one we already have in IBM, and it's one of the promises that make DITA robust enough to deliver cross-enterprise and cross-organization content sharing.  
I did not know that you had implemented systems that do generalization/specialization round tripping. Can you describe some of them?
 
 Paul Prescod
 


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