[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] ITEM: Cross-references to Topicheads and Implicit Title-only Topics
OK, then in the interest of being able to close this issue quickly on next week's telcon, could you please produce a revision of your proposal (without "implicit title-only" in the subject) that specifies just the suggested changes to the dita 1.2 language reference for TC approval? thanks, paul > -----Original Message----- > From: Eliot Kimber [mailto:ekimber@reallysi.com] > Sent: Tuesday, 2009 May 05 16:13 > To: Grosso, Paul; dita > Subject: Re: [dita] ITEM: Cross-references to Topicheads and > Implicit Title-only Topics > > On 5/5/09 3:48 PM, "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com> wrote: > > > After review, Jeff and I are generally okay with this, > > but if we're planning to approve something at next week's > > telcon, we need to be sure we know what we're approving. > > In most cases, Eliot's email does do that, but not in all. > > > > [Note, despite the subject--which suffers from legacy--this > > proposal is just about cross-references to topicheads. It > > does not mention/address implicit title-only topics.] > > > > More detailed "editorial" comments below (nothing technical). > > Sorry for the confusion--my haste to get something to the TC > in advance of > today's meeting. > > > >> 4. Under "data": > >> > >> - href= is allowed but the current spec doesn't say what it > >> means to specify > >> href= on data. Data-about mentions that href= on data > >> specifies the object > >> of the data. So clearly we need to say something to that > >> effect under data. > > > > Since no specific change has been suggested, I'm assuming this > > is just a comment in passing. Unless in the future some specific > > change is suggested, this is a no-op, and I'll assume any vote > > next week will not include anything on this. > > I think I need to propose specific language for data: > > 4. Add new third paragraph: > > Use the href attribute to point to the effective value of the > <data> element > (the object of the <data>). When the direct target of the > href attribute is > a topicref element, processors may choose to treat either the > topicref or > its ultimate target as the object of the <data> element. > > [WEK: I think I've understood the intent of href= on <data> > correctly in > this proposal. If not, then we need to agree as a TC what the > intent is.] > > >> 5. data-about > >> > >> I think the text under href, proposed above, is sufficient > >> since it's not a > >> navigation relationship but an annotation relationship. > > > > Another no-op comment. > > Yes. Item 5 is not a proposal. > > >> 7. lq > >> > >> Same as data-about--let href text serve, since use of > href= on lq is > >> effectively deprecated by the existence of longquoteref > > > > Another no-op comment. > > Correct--also not a proposal. > > > > I'm assuming there is no significance to #10 being missing. > > Correct, no significance. > > > We're okay with the first #12. > > > > I'm assuming there is no significance to having two #12's. > > Cut and paste error. > > Cheers, > > Eliot > ---- > 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]