Re: vocabulary module [was: results from recent DITA 1.2 terminologydiscussions]

[Eliot Kimber <ekimber@reallysi.com>]

On 11/18/09 9:29 AM, "Bruce Nevin (bnevin)" <bnevin@cisco.com> wrote:

> Could you clarify the phrase "unit of element type or attribute type
> declaration" please?
> Do you mean "unit of ... declarations"? Would "set of ... declarations"
> be equivalent?

"set of" is OK. 

I was trying to convey that atomic nature of a vocabulary module, that is,
that a vocabulary module has no further direct dependencies. Clearly I
didn't get that across.

>> For a given map type,
>> topic type, or domain, there is exactly one vocabulary module
>> that defines it.
> 
> Are there any vocabulary modules that do not define a map type, topic
> type, or domain?

No, that is the complete set of vocabulary modules.
 
> If not, could we say something like this?
> 
> The uniquely-named collection of element type and attribute type
> declarations that defines a map type, topic type, or domain.
> 
>> An abstract module may be implemented by any
>> number of different constraint mechanisms (DTDs, XSDs, etc.).
>> However, for a given constraint mechanism, there should be at
>> most one authoritative declaration of the module.
> 
> We already said it is unique. ("The ... collection ... that defines"
> says there's just one.) We already know that anything in DITA may be
> implemented by DTD or XSD. If there's a gotcha to warn about, maybe it
> should be stated more explicitly elsewhere.
> 
> Could the definition thus be reduced to that one sentence?

Works for me.

Cheers,

E.


-- 
Eliot Kimber
Senior Solutions Architect
"Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together"
Main: 610.631.6770
www.reallysi.com
www.rsuitecms.com