Hi Chris
Thanks for posting this. My post last week addressed this also.
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201303/msg00081.html
I think that if we define definition scope discussion of these matters will be easier.
Let me take a run at it...
Definition scope is merged map “element scope” including any topics referenced within that merge map element scope.
I realize we need to define merged map – but roughly I mean all the referenced maps inlined into one big map starting at the root map.
By “element scope” mean that for any element in XML, all the child elements are in scope.
Also, if we like, we could define global definition scope to mean the scope of the root element of the merged map.
Is this what you mean by “scope” in your proposal? Are there other words that serve us better?
A shared definition would help here before commenting further on your proposal.
cheers
Jim
From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:dita@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Chris Nitchie
Sent: April-02-13 11:43 AM
To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [dita] Groups - DITA 1.3 Proposal 13004 uploaded
Scoped keys keeps coming up so I figured it was time to refresh this proposal. I still consider it a work in progress requiring additional discussion, but this new version can be a basis for those discussions.
Chris
On Apr 2, 2013, at 2:31 PM, Christopher Nitchie<chris.nitchie@oberontech.com> wrote:
Submitter's message
Significantly reworked this proposal. Now includes provisions qualified key names in parent scopes, with examples. Also, hopefully, a bit clearer.
-- Mr. Christopher Nitchie
Document Name: DITA 1.3 Proposal 13004 Description Submitter: Mr. Christopher Nitchie |
Chris Nitchie
Oberon Technologies, Inc.
2640 Wildwood Trail
Saline, MI 48176
Main: 734.666.0400
Direct: 734.330.2978
Email: chris.nitchie@oberontech.com
