[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] Question about stepsection
How things are numbered is styling. I think there should be a lot of flexibility as to how things are styled. So making this an absolute requirement would make me uncomfortable.
But describing the intended default behavior for stepsection in the spec. seems like a good thing to do. I think Eliot would call this "Variable with defaults".
-Jeff
Variable with defaults
Features that MAY produce various behaviors or outputs, but for which the DITA specification defines a default that all conforming implementations MUST provide.
Implementations are NOT REQUIRED to make the DITA-defined default their default. Implementations are only REQUIRED to provide an appropriate set of options or configuration that will provide the DITA-defined defaults.
These features are primarily formatting defaults for elements where a default presentation is natural or expected, such as paragraphs, lists, and tables. An application for a specific use domain might define default formatting behaviors that are significantly different from the DITA-defined defaults. For example, an application specifically for legal information could provide a different default presentation from an application for technical documentation.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Robert D Anderson [mailto:robander@us.ibm.com] > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 2:00 PM > To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: [dita] Question about stepsection > > > Hello - nobody claimed responsibility for the "general task" item at > Tuesday's call, so this question goes to the full group. > > DITA 1.2 defines a new <stepsection> element which goes into <steps> and > <steps-unordered>. The expectation is that content in a <stepsection> > element will not be numbered together with the other steps. > > The proposal says that no new behaviors are defined by the general task > type proposal itself, but it also says that "specialized processing is > required to avoid numbering <stepsection> elements. " > http://www.oasis- > open.org/committees/download.php/26791/IssueNumber12011v1.2rev3.html > > So the question is - should the spec describe this numbering as a required > behavior, or is it optional? Does the language mean only that, should one > decide to skip numbering, specialized processing would be required? > > I think the intent was to make this a required behavior, so if I do not > hear otherwise, that's what the spec will say. The latest draft simply > asks > this question in a draft-comment. > > Thanks - > > Robert D Anderson > IBM Authoring Tools Development > Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit > (507) 253-8787, T/L 553-8787 (Good Monday & Thursday) > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]