RE: [dita] Are indexterm ranges backwards incompatible?

["Esrig, Bruce \(Bruce\)" <esrig@lucent.com>]

On the other hand, Dana,

 

This logic could be applied to outlaw any extension, since every user would have to review every document to determine whether they had intended to use the extension.

 

With DITA 1.1, we clarify that an indexterm designates a point at which to start reading about the indexed subject. The DITA 1.1 conceit is that this was true all along. In DITA 1.0, this aspect of the interpretation was unspecified because there was no way to specify anything else. But if it even makes sense to take sides on this, it's possible to argue that the default disambiguation is the DITA 1.1 way. Indexing practice typically presumes that an index entry refers to a point at which to start reading.

 

For those who wish to specify a range of pages possibly not starting at the top of a topic, a new capability is provided that permits such a specification. The specification of a range generates a page range in outputs that have page numbers, such as PDF files. In other outputs, it generates a reference to the start page only.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bruce Esrig

---

From: Dana Spradley [mailto:dana.spradley@oracle.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 12:41 PM
To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [dita] Are indexterm ranges backwards incompatible?

After this morning's meeting, I'm starting to think that maybe ranged indexterm should be considered backwards incompatible with DITA 1.0.

In 1.0, it is ambiguous whether indexterms point to discussions confined to a single page, or to extended discussions that begin on a certain page.

Introducing ranged indexterms removes that ambiguity.

Users who want to make use of ranged indexterms would need to go back through their entire document set and replace current point indexterms with ranged indexterms where appropriate - otherwise any new ranged indexterms they add would cause these old point indexterms to be misinterpreted.

Doesn't that amount to backwards incompatibility?

--Dana