Re: AW: [dita] RE: Hazard Statement Width

[Don Day <dond@us.ibm.com>]

I am chuckling, Chris. Whenever a Standard costs money to obtain, that is
all the more reason to keep it at best a suggestion in an implementation
guide.  Thanks for the URLs, again which I'll copy into the new issues list
for later. Thanks, all.

Regards,
--
Don Day
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Architect, Lightweight DITA Publishing Solutions
Email: dond@us.ibm.com
11501 Burnet Rd. MS9033E015, Austin TX 78758
Phone: +1 512-244-2868 (home office)

"Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
 Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"
   --T.S. Eliot


                                                                       
  From:       "Christian Kravogel" <christian.kravogel@seicodyne.ch>
                                                                       
  To:         "'Grosso, Paul'" <pgrosso@ptc.com>, Don Day/Austin/IBM@IBMUS, "'dita'"
              <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>                          
                                                                       
  Date:       03/24/2009 12:29 PM                                      
                                                                       
  Subject:    AW: [dita] RE: Hazard Statement Width                    
                                                                       





Paul,

Now it's clearinfying what happened.

First I also have to appologize, I should have verified before I answered
to you in the first place.

You are right, I just checked the history of the proposal and in one of the
first drafts from 2006 we have had proposed 4 attributes controlling the
layout of a hazardstatement accoridng to the Z535.4 standard:

labelformat (1|2|3|other) "2"
panelarrangement (horizontal|vertical) "horizontal"
width NMTOKEN #IMPLIED
align (left|right|center) "left"

and if I recall correct they have been implemented as a preversion in the
Arbortext Editor 5.3 M030 release in Summer 2007.

These additional attributes got removed by the TC - approx. in fall 2007 -
and we moved back to the base attributes available from the note element.
So we never went to the point of discussing how those attributes should be
used.

All these 4 attributes belong to the definitions in the ANSI Z535.4
standard, so if we are going to add them e.g. in DITA 1.3 we will have to
provide clear guidance how to use them in creation and rendering of a
document.

For those who would like to consult the definitions in ANSI Z535.4 you can
purchase it for 75.- $ at http://webstore.ansi.org

Best regards

Chris



(Embedded image moved to file: pic05273.gif)





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
christian.kravogel@seicodyne.com

(Embedded image moved to file: pic07804.jpg)
Member of the DITA Technical Committee
Chairman of the DITA Machine Industry Subcommittee


Von: Grosso, Paul [mailto:pgrosso@ptc.com]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 24. März 2009 18:06
An: Christian Kravogel; dond@us.ibm.com; dita
Betreff: [dita] RE: Hazard Statement Width

I do apologize for all the unnecessary discussion.

Someone told me there was a width attribute on hazardstatement, and I
failed to verify that statement against the actual DITA 1.2 DTDs.  It turns
out the user was looking at a DTD they must have modified.

Given that there is no width attribute on hazardstatement, we don't need to
add anything to the spec here, so we can cancel the decision we made today
to do so.

paul

 From: Christian Kravogel [mailto:christian.kravogel@seicodyne.ch]
 Sent: Tuesday, 2009 March 24 11:21
 To: Grosso, Paul; dond@us.ibm.com; 'dita'
 Subject: Hazard Statement Width

 Paul, Don,

 I just checked the content model of hazardstatement and it's child
 elements, and I do not find any potential error.

 Paul, your statement "In a hazard statement, you can set the width of the
 hazard statement using the attribute width." is not correct.
 hazardstatement has been derived from the element note and there is no
 width attribute.

 So we can shorten it and just leave everything as it is.


 The width for a hazardstatement still is an issue, an important issue, but
 it is just a rendering issue. And we may have to provide guidance or
 recomendations in a document.


 If we like to be very fastidious we may have to cover issues like: when a
 hazardstatement with a hazardsymbol is placed into a table and the width
 of the hazardsymbol is exceeding the width of the tablecell, the table or
 even the pagewidth. But then we may need to catch all cases of nested
 width attributes in our specification.

 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
 christian.kravogel@seicodyne.com

 Member of the DITA Technical Committee
 Chairman of the DITA Machine Industry Subcommittee

pic05273.gif

pic07804.jpg