We need to add this item to the 1.3 Triage list for index and for glossary (if appropriate).
DITA
suggestion: Allow use of <ph> in <indexterm>
Posted by: "Emma Burrows"
emma.burrows@rpharms.com
emma_j_burrows
Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:20 am (PST)
Since it’s been suggested simply mentioning it here, here goes. Most of the “problemsâ€
I’ve encountered with the DITA structures were due to incompatibilities with the legacy schema (partially inspired by Docbook as it happens ;-) and just require some kind of hack, but this one I think is a genuine bug that should be resolved at the source:
Background:
I am converting a large body of medical reference works to DITA. This includes chemical formulae and substance names where superscript, subscript and italics are significant. These terms can appear practically anywhere, and in particular in index entries. The
printed books have mammoth indices, sometimes longer than the narrative content itself, and these terms are also used to optimise the searches on the web versions.
Current situation:
The <sup>, <sup> and <i> defined in the Highlighting domain are all based on <ph>. As far as I can tell, <ph> is not allowed in <indexterm>. Consequently it isn’t possible to correctly mark up H2 receptor antagonist (with a subscript 2) in the index. I can’t
think of any logical reason why this should be so (and if I may name-drop for a moment, Eliot Kimber agreed when we discussed this a while back ☺).
Desired situation:
For <ph> to be added to the content model of <indexterm>.
HTH ☺
JoAnn T. Hackos, PhD
President
Comtech Services Inc.
710 Kipling Street, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80215
joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com
skype joannhackos
