RE: [dita] Should "warning" be in note type list?

["Amber Swope" <amber.swope@xmetal.com>]

Hi there,

I think that the Machine industry subcommittee is putting together a
proposal to address the ANSI and ISO notice standards that are not in
the DITA spec.

Amber

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Hudson [mailto:scott.hudson@flatironssolutions.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 4:46 PM
To: W. Eliot Kimber
Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [dita] Should "warning" be in note type list?

I agree. I think it should be added as well. It is an important 
distinction for many types of documents.

Best regards,

--Scott

W. Eliot Kimber wrote:
> I noticed that the "type" attribute of note does not contain "warning"

> although it does contain "caution" and "danger".
> 
> Since note/caution/warning is a pretty standard hierarchy of
admonition 
> types [I discovered this because a client's documents have warnings
that 
> are labled "Warning" and I didn't find the word "warning" in the dita 
> reference] I would think that "warning" should be in the list.
> 
> Note that at least in my experience (for example, with aircraft 
> maintenance), that there is a distinction between "warning" and
"danger" 
> that is, if I'm remembering correctly, the difference between damage
to 
> equipment (warning) and injury to people (danger).
> 
> However, if the intent is that one of the other keywords is a synonym 
> for "warning" I think it would be good to mention this in the spec.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Eliot