[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] Prototype DITA 1.1 DTDs
The doctype for the OASIS approved version will have /OASIS/ versus /IBM/ to differentiate the unversioned doctype. Regards, -- Don Day Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee IBM Lead DITA Architect Email: dond@us.ibm.com 11501 Burnet Rd. MS9033E015, Austin TX 78758 Phone: +1 512-838-8550 T/L: 678-8550 "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?" --T.S. Eliot Scott Hudson <scottys.log@gmai l.com> To Paul Prescod 06/21/2006 03:28 <paul.prescod@xmetal.com> PM cc "Rodolfo M. Raya" <rmraya@heartsome.net>, Robert D Anderson/Rochester/IBM@IBMUS, dita@lists.oasis-open.org Subject Re: [dita] Prototype DITA 1.1 DTDs I realize that bookmap hasn't been official until 1.1, but there have been big changes in that model from the demo. Content valid against one version will not against the other. So far, the biggest issue I've seen is with title, but there may be others. The different public identifiers would alleviate any concerns over compatibility, because you know what version you are validating against. DocBook's naming and versioning for v5.0 is documented here for those curious: http://www.docbook.org/docs/howto/#cust-naming Best regards, --Scott .Paul Prescod wrote: > To summarize: the reason you would like version-dependent public > identifiers is because you are nervous that DITA 1.1 will not be 100% > backwards compatible with DITA 1.0. Is that right? If it turned out to > be 100% backwards compatible then you would not mind installing DITA > 1.1 for your translators to use with DITA 1.0 and 1.1 documents. > > Paul Prescod > -- (See attached file: scottys.log.vcf)
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]