Here is the conversation that Erik Hennum and I had about “inherit”
and “cascade” a little over a year ago now. Hopefully it is still useful.
-Jeff
From: Ogden, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 2:40 PM
To: 'Erik Hennum'
Cc: 'Robert D Anderson'
Subject: RE: cascade vs. inherit
OK, then for the purposes of element and attribute values we won’t
use the term “inherit” and we’ll saying things like:
[certain] element and attribute values cascade to
decedents
[certain] element and attribute values are propagated
from a map to a topic and will cascade within the topic
Let me know if this looks more or less right. No reply
necessary unless I’ve got it wrong.
-Jeff
From: Erik Hennum
[mailto:ehennum@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 2:02 PM
To: Ogden, Jeff
Cc: Robert D Anderson
Subject: Re: cascade vs. inherit
Hi, Jeff:
To avoid confusion of type hierarchies and containment hierarchies, I'd suggest
the following terminology:
- "inherit" for
type hierarchies
- "cascade" for
containment hierarchies
Because topics are not part of the map containment hierarchy, maybe
"propagate" or "populate" would be a better term.
On the other hand, maybe obsessing about such distinctions is a little
excessive...
Thanks for the pragmatic scrupulousness,
Erik Hennum
ehennum@us.ibm.com
----------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Erik,
[The DITA 1.1 Architecture
Spec] uses the term
“inherit” in the sense that certain attributes and elements inherit values from
ancestors. But I think we want to change things to use the term “cascade”
instead, as in certain attributes and element values cascade to their
decedents.
I want to make sure I am using
the terminology correctly and Robert suggested that I check with you.
Is this a change that we want to
make?
Should cascade replace all use
of the term inherit or are there still cases where a value doesn’t cascade, but
it does inherit?
We have the case of cascading
within a single topic or map document and we have the case of cascading from a
map to a topic. Is cascade the right term to use for these two cases?
-Jeff