[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] use of <term>
Not to be flippant, but I would see the requirement Bruce outlines as being obvious to the implementor of any DITA-aware CMS or custom publishing system vendor. I don't think it's the place of the spec to talk about general requirements for how to manage and author DITA content--that's simply too open-ended. But that seems like exactly the role of the DITA Adoption TC--to clearly articulate requirements like this one. The DITA spec needs to focus on the facts of what it says about the markup and direct processing expectations and requirements. General how-to information and general "you could do X" or "X would be really helpful" is simply not appropriate for a standard. Or said another way, the standard is law, what Bruce has presented is interpretation. They are both important but they belong in different documents. Cheers, Eliot On 3/12/09 10:45 AM, "Bruce Nevin (bnevin)" <bnevin@cisco.com> wrote: > I see no harm in the spec giving indications to vendors as to what they should > be developing. > > This is an important function that's been in my requirements doc for six years > or more, with no vendor supporting it. Process as follows: Writer marks an > item in a topic with <term>. Processing harvests every <term> in all the > topics in a map (or other aggregation). If a given <term>-tagged item also > appears in an associated glossary document (associated in the publishing > environment), it is included in a glossary for the publication that is > assembled and published as part of that document, and appropriately linked in > online renditions. If a given <term>-tagged item does not appear in the > glossary, a flag is raised for someone to create a glossary entry for it, and > until then that item is not rendered as a glossary item (link, etc.) or in any > special way. > > At present, glossaries are labor intensive, error prone, and often omitted > although desired. > > This is an example of how use cases may not be being communicated to vendors, > and the spec can help close that loop. Relevance to adoption is obvious. > > /B > > > ________________________________ > > From: Christian Kravogel [mailto:christian.kravogel@seicodyne.ch] > Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 11:49 AM > To: 'Alan Houser'; 'dita' > Subject: AW: [dita] use of <term> > > > I pretty much like working with xquery and the idea that this problem should > be left to impementers or actually be solved by the stylesheet. But I am not > sure if that is reliable with all languages and character sets. > > Regardless if that task can be solved by implementers in all cases, we should > not generate expectations to future DITA implementations in the langref over a > period of 3 DITA releases. > > Either we should provide associative linking to matching glossary entries as > it is mentioned in the langref, > or we mention that the implementer can link the <term> with the corresponding > <glossterm> via stylesheet i.e. xquery. > > I do not propose "deleting" but "giving unambiguous descriptions who do not > create expectations we may not going to fullfill" > > Best regards > > Chris > > > > > > SeicoDyne GmbH > Eichenstrasse 16 > CH-6015 Reussbühl > Switzerland > Tel: +41 41 534 66 97 > Mob: +41 78 790 66 97 > Skype: seicodyne > > www.seicodyne.com <blocked::http://www.seicodyne.com/> > christian.kravogel@seicodyne.com > <blocked::mailto:christian.kravogel@seicodyne.com> > > > > > > > Member of the DITA Technical Committee > Chairman of the DITA Machine Industry Subcommittee > > > ________________________________ > > Von: Alan Houser [mailto:arh@groupwellesley.com] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. März 2009 16:32 > An: Christian Kravogel > Cc: 'dita' > Betreff: Re: [dita] use of <term> > > > I recall that there was a semantic linking feature on the table for DITA 1.1, > which may have been associated with the <term> element. I believe it died more > to lack of inertia than anything else. > > I would concur with Paul Grosso's assessment that this would be application > behavior, best left to implementers. > > -Alan > --- > > Alan Houser, President > Group Wellesley, Inc. > 412-363-3481 > www.groupwellesley.com > > > Christian Kravogel wrote: > > I have just checked the langref of the element <term> in version 1.0, 1.1 and > 1.2. All langref descriptions are identically with the following sentance: > > The <term> element identifies words that represent extended definitions or > explanations. In future development of DITA, for example, terms might provide > associative linking to matching glossary entries. > > As "future development of DITA" is mentioned within 3 DITA releases we may > have either to change this text or to provide a solution. Or do we already > have solved this, then we may have to update the text. > > Best regards > > Chris > > > > > SeicoDyne GmbH > Eichenstrasse 16 > CH-6015 Reussbühl > Switzerland > Tel: +41 41 534 66 97 > Mob: +41 78 790 66 97 > Skype: seicodyne > > www.seicodyne.com <blocked::http://www.seicodyne.com/> > christian.kravogel@seicodyne.com > <blocked::mailto:christian.kravogel@seicodyne.com> > > > > > > > Member of the DITA Technical Committee > Chairman of the DITA Machine Industry Subcommittee > > ---- Eliot Kimber | Senior Solutions Architect | Really Strategies, Inc. email: ekimber@reallysi.com <mailto:ekimber@reallysi.com> office: 610.631.6770 | cell: 512.554.9368 2570 Boulevard of the Generals | Suite 213 | Audubon, PA 19403 www.reallysi.com <http://www.reallysi.com> | http://blog.reallysi.com <http://blog.reallysi.com> | www.rsuitecms.com <http://www.rsuitecms.com>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]