[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] DITA 1.2 suggestion--add a class attribute to the dita element
I've added dita/@class, dita/@DITAArchVersion, and the scope/format/type requirements to the DITA 1.2 list. I didn't add the locktitle one because I think that is something to be resolved in the 1.1 specification. I've added Erik's mapref proposal - with the expectation that he'll provide a link or send more info, hint hint -- because I think it is broader than your mapref suggestion, and would cover your requirement as well (regardless of the discussion about chapter pointing to maps). If you want to add them in to the 1.2 list anyway, please go ahead and update the wiki. For anybody else coming up with a new requirement or remembering an old one, I'm sure both Gershon and I would be happy if you wanted to edit the wiki on your own. I'd encourage anybody doing so to also add a link to the proposal or note that provides more details, if one is available. http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DITA_Specification_1.2_Requirements Robert D Anderson IBM Authoring Tools Development Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit (507) 253-8787, T/L 553-8787 "W. Eliot Kimber" <ekimber@innodata -isogen.com> To "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com> 03/19/2007 03:48 cc PM "DITA TC list" <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> Subject Re: [dita] DITA 1.2 suggestion--add a class attribute to the dita element Grosso, Paul wrote: >> Therefore I don't see how having specializations of <dita> is >> needed to address the requirement. > > At one level you're probably right. > > But I think it can quickly get quite confusing if we have multiple > DTDs that are all called ditabase and all use the same <dita> root tag. Well there's no requirement that the different shells be called "dita_base.dtd" but I understand your point. > And all DITA documents will have a root tag with both a DITArchVersion > and a class attribute which will make it easier to know that they are > DITA documents and what kind they are (map vs. topic). Today ditabases > are something of an exception in that we have to look at one of the > child > elements to the root tag before we know if it is a DITA document and > what kind. This is definitely a good thing and one could argue that the lack of it in 1.1 is in fact a bug and not a design decision. Cheers, Eliot -- W. Eliot Kimber Professional Services Innodata Isogen 8500 N. Mopac, Suite 402 Austin, TX 78759 (214) 954-5198 ekimber@innodata-isogen.com www.innodata-isogen.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]