OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

dita message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [dita] referencing a bookmap from a map

>What happens by default shouldn’t matter to the DITA specification.  The 1.1 specification is
>entirely silent about these sorts of details. You can sort of guess from the names and some
>of the element descriptions, but that is all you are doing. I think the 1.2 specification
>should remain silent on these sorts of details.
So what is 12055 doing? Are those required behaviors, or just suggested, or something else?

To clarify:

- I'm suggesting behavior only for aggregating processes - not every possible map process
- I'm suggesting behavior that would be a default, not a requirement. I'd actually be happy with being parallel to whatever strength we put behind 12055. Just as long as we're consistent.
- as Robert Anderson noted, if we're going to specify that a <chapter> reference to a bookmap should resolve into a set of <chapter> references to the bookmap's parts, then we should have the same level of specification for what  a <topicref> does (and I think it should do something parallel)
- otherwise, how does a user get rid of semantics that don't make sense for the reusing context? for example, a writer reusing a bookmap into an Eclipse TOC who doesn't want "chapter xxx" generated.

Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
Lead IBM DITA Architect

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]