I think we're still working up to one Michael.
Do you have a suggestion for how the serious reservations I've
expressed with the current state of the proposal could not simply be
suppressed, but acknowledged and overcome?
The TC's process seems to have become very win/lose, IMHO - or maybe it
was always that way.
--Dana
Michael Priestley wrote:
Dana, do you have a concrete
proposal
for a change to the DITA 1.1 specification?
Michael Priestley
IBM DITA Architect and Classification Schema PDT Lead
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25
I could agree to this compromise,
provided
the default behavior is as I've outlined.
Then we could do the right thing semantically in the default - but any
particular user organization could override it and behave as
illogically
as they like.
--Dana
Paul Prescod wrote:
I don't think we can mandate
it,
but we can submit the feature request. Given that it is open source, it
depends on someone to implement it. You or I could just do it. I would
be surprised if anyone would reject such a benign patch (although the
default
behaviour might be controversial).
Can we agree to this
compromise
rather than continuing with the argument?
From: Dana Spradley [mailto:dana.spradley@oracle.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 12:44 PM
To: Paul Prescod
Cc: Chris Wong; JoAnn Hackos; Grosso, Paul; dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [dita] Are indexterm ranges backwards incompatible?
And I suppose the following switch as
well:
- generate-page-ranges-for-ranged-indexterms:
Yes/no
I agree that with such switches available, this issue would go away.
How do we mandate that they be put in the official DITA toolkit?
--Dana
Paul Prescod wrote:
The fact that the
distinction
is "sometimes made" suggests to me that this is another thing
to put in the hands of the end user to express however their tool
expresses
it. One can imagine options to the DITA toolkit (or other publishing
engine):
generate-page-ranges-for-index-entries-on-adjacent-pages:
Yes/no
generate-page-ranges-for-entire-topics:
Yes/no
From: Chris Wong [mailto:cwong@idiominc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 11:04 AM
To: JoAnn Hackos; Grosso, Paul; dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [dita] Are indexterm ranges backwards incompatible?
"A distinction is
sometimes
made between continued discussion of a subject (index, for example,
34-36)
and individual references to the subject on a series of pages (34, 35,
36). " -- 17.9, Chicago Manual of Style
|