Re: [dita] Bug: fragref does not allow keyref

[Eliot Kimber <ekimber@reallysi.com>]

On 1/25/10 8:15 AM, "Robert D Anderson" <robander@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> As I've always understood these elements, they do not make sense when used
> to reference a fragment or synnote in another diagram. I know that the
> tools we use to render syntax diagrams in IBM do not allow these to
> reference elements in other diagrams.
> 
> The DITA 1.1 langspec for fragref/@href says that the target fragment
> "should" be in the same diagram. I have always viewed this as a "must". The
> purpose of <fragment> is to break out a chunk of syntax to render on its
> own; it seems that fragref would be difficult to understand if it takes you
> out of the current diagram to syntax that is part of another set of syntax.
> 
> For synnoteref, the 1.1 spec begins with "The syntax note (<synnoteref>)
> reference element references a syntax note element (<synnote>) that has
> already been defined elsewhere in the syntax diagram." The synnoteref/@href
> description also says that the target must be in the same diagram.

I was basing my analysis on this statement under synnoteref:

" The same notation can be used in more than one syntax definition. "

That suggests that you might define a syntax note in one diagram and
reference it from another diagram. Otherwise the statement does not appear
to make sense.

I think that limiting the addressing syntax in order to enforce an
essentially arbitrary restriction is the wrong thing to do. First, the @href
syntax in no way limits the scope of the address, so that by itself cannot
enforce the "same diagram" requirement. It also creates a special case that
processors have to handle to no obvious purpose.

If the intent of the standard is that *there is no possible universe in
which references from one diagram to another would ever be useful or
meaningful* then the definition of these elements should say that and let
processors validate the addresses, URI or key-based.

But if we cannot say with certainty that cross-diagram references are
*never* meaningful then we *must* allow keyref by the basic principle of
consistency.

Cheers,

E.

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