[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] syntax for domain usage declaration
I'm reviewing the topic "Domain usage declaration (the domains attribute)" in the Architectural Spec. I brought this question here first because I didn't want to comment at http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/specialization2#Domainusagedeclaration.2 8thedomainsattribute.29 until I better understood what was intended. It sounds like the discussion and the example in this topic should cover attribute domain declarations as well. Is this what you're saying? /Bruce > -----Original Message----- > From: Ogden, Jeff [mailto:jogden@ptc.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 4:42 PM > To: Bruce Nevin (bnevin); DITA TC; Robert D Anderson > Subject: RE: [dita] syntax for domain usage declaration > > We have two sorts of domain specializations, "classic" and > "attribute", but we don't call "classic domain > specializations" that, they are just "domain specializations" > because they came first. > > a(module module) is correct for attribute domains and in that > case "topic" and "map" do not enter into it. All attribute > specializations are based on either @props or @base. > > An example domains attribute value could look something like this: > > (topic ui-d) (topic sw-d) (topic pr-d cpp-d) a(base > newattrname) a(props someothernewattrname) > > -Jeff > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bruce Nevin (bnevin) [mailto:bnevin@cisco.com] > > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 4:21 PM > > To: DITA TC; Ogden, Jeff; Robert D Anderson > > Subject: RE: [dita] syntax for domain usage declaration > > > > I guess I don't understand the reason for using regular expression > > syntax to describe the syntax for entering an attribute value in a > > specialization. Does some tool for creating domain usage > declarations > > require regular expressions as input? Is XSL pattern matching > required? > > What audience is the regular expression syntax directed to, and for > > what purpose? > > > > Wouldn't it be more straightforward to say each > parenthesized module > > ancestry specification is a space-separated sequence of > module names > > beginning with the root module name (topic or map) and > ending with the > > name of the module whose ancestry is being declared? (The phrase > > "parenthesized module ancestry specification" occurs just prior to > this > > definition.) > > > > Jeff said something similar: > > > > > It doesn't fully describe the domains attribute value since > > > attribute domain declarations take the form: > > > a(module1 moduleN) > > > where module1 is always either "props" or "base". > > > > (But did you mean "where module1 is always either "topic" or "map"? > And > > I don't understand the leading 'a', or did you mean a=(module1 > > moduleN)?) > > > > Robert added: > > > > > I wonder if it might be clearer if the example also allowed (topic > > pr-d), > > > the programming domain; the topic then contains 3 domains > coming off > > of topic, > > > and one domain that further specializes one of those three. > > > > It would be just as informative to point out that the > example includes > > cpp but excludes pr-d as a whole. > > > > But my question on reading this is, having declared pr-d, > why would I > > want to still declare cpp-d? All the elements in cpp-d are already > > available as part of pr-d, aren't they? Is the ancestry of pr-d not > > recoverable from that of cpp-d? > > > > /Bruce > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Ogden, Jeff [mailto:jogden@ptc.com] > > > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 2:34 PM > > > To: Bruce Nevin (bnevin); DITA TC > > > Subject: RE: [dita] syntax for domain usage declaration > > > > > > I think it is correct as far as it goes. It is hard to > read because > > > of the different usages of paren. > > > > > > It doesn't fully describe the domains attribute value since > > > attribute domain declarations take the form: > > > > > > a(module1 moduleN) where module1 is always either "props" > > > or "base". > > > > > > I don't think we have any real attribute domain declarations > > > anywhere in the DITA DTDs or XSDs. That is too bad since it makes > > > finding a real example to look at hard. > > > > > > -Jeff > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Bruce Nevin (bnevin) [mailto:bnevin@cisco.com] > > > > Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 2:20 PM > > > > To: DITA TC > > > > Subject: [dita] syntax for domain usage declaration > > > > > > > > Is the following description correct? It's in > > > > ArchSpec/Base/Specialization/"Domain usage declaration (the > domains > > > > attribute)". I'm having trouble making sense of it: > > > > > > > > Each domain defines its module ancestry as a > parenthesized > > > > sequence of space-separated module names from > root module > > > > to provided module: '(', modulename, (' ', > modulename)+, ')'. > > > > > > > > The example given there is > > > > > > > > domains="(topic ui-d) (topic sw-d) (topic pr-d cpp-d)" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the > > > OASIS TC that > > > > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS > at: > > > > > > > https://www.oasis- > > open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php > > > > > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]