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] Normative language specification

On 12/1/09 12:07 PM, "Park Seth-R01164" <R01164@freescale.com> wrote:

> I've been spreading rumors that the DTDs are normative when there is a
> conflict between the lang spec and the DTDs.
> There have been some discussions recently that clearly indicate that DTD
> technology is insufficient to represent the normative language
> specifications. 
> Can we clarify our position on this?

I think we have to make it clear that when we say "conflict" we mean
"incompatible content model rules".

In particular, if the prose says "a then b" and the DTD says "b, a", the DTD
is the authority.

But if the prose says, as in the case of <section>, "a section has an
optional title" where the DTD must, by necessity, say title*, the prose is
the authority (because a single title is consistent with title*).

That is, the prose may define additional constraints on the content models
defined by the DTD when the DTD is incapable of defining those constraints

Note also that the spec says that when there is an inconsistency between the
DTD and the XSD, the DTD is taken as the authority.


Eliot Kimber
Senior Solutions Architect
"Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together"
Main: 610.631.6770

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