OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

dita message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [dita] Re: Discuss list processing expectations

This time hopefully without the Yahoo junk...

I'm still against using the same element in both block and inline contexts. If DITA provided an <inline-ul> (or whatever) for use in the example Paul gave I'd be OK with it. I still feel that block elements should be used only in block contexts, and inline elements in inline contexts. Paul's example would then be marked up as follows:

<p>In order to install Acme Pro Plus Plus, your system must
meet the following requirements:
  <li>Pentium 4 CPU or later</li>
  <li>1 GB RAM or more</li>
  <li>At least 350 MB free disk space</li>
unless you are running the Limited version of the product.

Obviously we're not going to change the DTDs for 1.2, but perhaps we could consider an inline unordered list element for a future release, when we can improve on the current situation where <ul> functions as both block and inline.

For 1.2, maybe we should provide Paul's example as an exception to the general rule, and maybe even state that a future DITA release may provide a different inline element for this purpose?

Note also I said the spec should encourage the best practice via "should", so users using mixed markup are not going against the spec.


----- Original Message ----
> From: Robert D Anderson <robander@us.ibm.com>
> To: DITA TC List <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 8, 2008 5:18:01 PM
> Subject: RE: [dita] Re: Discuss list processing expectations
> I'd second what Paul says - I know a lot of users who would get upset if
> the spec told them they could not include the samples Paul gives inside a
> single paragraph.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]