Michael’s second point is exactly the one I was trying
to make on the call today. I have had clients with house styles that require
such mixed content. I want DITA to be able to be used by the widest possible
community. To that end, Michaels’ advantage and disadvantage approach
lets the user decide the course of action most desireable for there situation.
Rob
Rob Frankland
Sock Monkey Consulting, LLC
12408 Kallgren RD
NE
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
From: Michael
Priestley [mailto:mpriestl@ca.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 9:52
AM
To: Gershon L Joseph [Yahoo]
Cc: DITA TC List; Robert D
Anderson
Subject: Re: [dita] Re: Discuss
list processing expectations
In what sense is that list "inline"? It
defines the start of a new block. It does so within the context of an existing
block. You can also nest lists inside other lists, or inside table cells.
And
to reiterate, I am against any best practice that says users "should"
avoid mixed content models. I am ok, per Jeff's suggestion, with a best
practice that lays out the advantages and disadvantages of each approach.
Michael
Priestley
Lead IBM DITA Architect
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25
|
"Gershon L Joseph
\[Yahoo\]" <gljoseph@yahoo.com>
04/08/2008 11:51 AM
|
|
To
|
Robert D Anderson
<robander@us.ibm.com>, DITA TC List <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
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:
<inline-ul>
<li>Pentium 4 CPU or later</li>
<li>1 GB RAM or more</li>
<li>At least 350 MB free disk
space</li>
</inline-ul>
unless you are running the Limited version of the
product.
</p>
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.
Gershon
----- 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave
the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. You may a link to this
group and all your TCs in OASIS
at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php