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] Attribute cascade proposal


> I think I agree with David that it needs to be possible to specify the
merge
> behavior on a per-condition basis on any element where cascading would
> apply.
>
> Without that level of control, the mechanism would be insufficiently
> granular.

Yep - that's the main reason I think any attribute controlling this should
be CDATA - not limited to a binary choice like "merge" or "nomerge" (though
I think at least those two core values are required). Ignoring syntax, I
can easily picture an implementation like David's with something like
"TOKEN-A audience TOKEN-B platform product".

> Option (3), processor decides, is a non-starter for me because you'd have
no
> way to predict behavior. I don't like options (1) and (2) for the same
> reasons everyon else doesn't like them.

Agreed. Mostly just listed those to show what had already been considered
(and would likely be suggested), and why they were not my primary
suggestion.

Thanks -

Robert D Anderson
IBM Authoring Tools Development
Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit (http://dita-ot.sourceforge.net/)

Eliot Kimber <ekimber@rsicms.com> wrote on 05/22/2013 06:30:15:

> From: Eliot Kimber <ekimber@rsicms.com>
> To: "Helfinstine, David" <dhelfinstine@ptc.com>, Chris Nitchie
> <chris.nitchie@oberontech.com>, Robert D Anderson/Rochester/
> IBM@IBMUS, dita <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>,
> Date: 05/22/2013 06:37
> Subject: Re: [dita] Attribute cascade proposal
>
> I think I agree with David that it needs to be possible to specify the
merge
> behavior on a per-condition basis on any element where cascading would
> apply.
>
> Without that level of control, the mechanism would be insufficiently
> granular.
>
> There should be a way to define blanket merging rules for the case where
you
> simply want everything to behave the same way, but that can't be the only
> option.
>
> Option (3), processor decides, is a non-starter for me because you'd have
no
> way to predict behavior. I don't like options (1) and (2) for the same
> reasons everyon else doesn't like them.
>
> Cheers,
>
> E.
>
> On 5/21/13 5:07 PM, "Helfinstine, David" <dhelfinstine@ptc.com> wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I like #4 in general also:
> >
> > #4 Rather than a blanket policy it might be nice to be able to say
> > cascade="NOMERGE audience otherprops specAttrFromProps ZIPPERMERGE
> product". I
> > wouldn't want to presume that a customer would always want all or
> nothing, nor
> > that all would want to have the same cascade. The idea above is
> the uppercased
> > items are the tokens and those things that come after would apply.Those
that
> > weren't specified would work the default way of merging.
> >
> > If it is set on a map by map basis, the DITA 1.2 spec says this:
> >
> >         As with values that cascade within a map, the cascading is
> additive if
> > the attribute permits    multiple values (such as @audience). When the
> > attribute only permits one value, the cascading   value overrides the
> > top-level element.
> >
> > So there would have to be some addition as to which policy wins (
> probably the
> > outer map setting as with other overriding items) but that needs some
> > consideration as mentioned.
> >
> > FYI:
> > Some releases back we realized that many of our customers had a need to
> > specify the behavior that you described. These customers were
> often using our
> > "profiling" feature which depended on profiling attributes NOT merging.
The
> > way that Chris mentioned was a way to do this via specialization (yes,
the
> > name is backwards) but many customers wanted out of the box behavior
also.
> >
> > Currently we provide a "global" out of the box way for customers to set
a
> > policy of whether attributes that normally merge will merge or not
merge.
> > Making this standardized would be great.
> >
> > Thanks all.
> >
> > - Dave H.
> >
> > Dave Helfinstine
> > DHelfinstine@ptc.com
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:dita@lists.oasis-open.org]On
Behalf
> > Of Chris Nitchie
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 2:32 PM
> > To: 'Robert D Anderson'; 'dita'
> > Subject: RE: [dita] Attribute cascade proposal
> >
> > Arbortext has an a proprietary approach to this, too, but it's done in
the
> > definition of the attribute specialization, and not specified in the
map, so
> > it may not work for all the necessary use cases. If an attribute is a
> > specialization of props-nooverride - that is, its @domains token looks
like
> > "a(props props-nooverride attrName)", then for that attribute -
> that attribute
> > only, and all instances of that attribute - new values on child
> > branches/elements override values inherited from parent
branches/elements,
> > instead of merging. (Yes, the naming is awkward and probably
> backwards.) This
> > wouldn't handle the specific example here, because @platform wouldn't
be
> > specialized from props-nooverride, and you can't make some instances of
> > 'nooverrides' attributes merged and others non-merging, but it seems to
have
> > worked well enough for our purposes.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert D Anderson [mailto:robander@us.ibm.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 3:17 PM
> > To: dita
> > Subject: [dita] Attribute cascade proposal
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > As with the branch filtering item, I'm hoping to get some initial TC
> > feedback on expected direction with the cascade item.
> >
> > Basic use case is a map like the following, applies to 3 platforms:
> > <map platform="mac win linux">
> >  ....
> >     <topicref href="nested-branch.dita"
platform="mac">...</topicref>  ....
> > </map>
> >
> > Per the spec today, when platform cascades, values combine. This means
if I
> > (accurately) indicate that my map applies to 3 platforms, I cannot then
> > restrict one section of that map to a specific platform - values
combine, so
> > that even my mac-only branch is treated as mac/win/linux.
> >
> > I expect there are many cases where this is valid and proper - and
> > applications have implemented this - so we cannot simply change the
> > behavior. The other option is to provide author or tool control over
the
> > behavior. Potential solutions considered:
> >
> > 1) Extend @lockmeta to add some control over whether attributes get
merged.
> > I don't like this because it's on <topicmeta> -- so to find out
if@platform
> > cascades, we might have to check parent/topicmeta/@lockmeta, then
> > parent/parent/topicmeta/@lockmeta, and so on -- too indirect and likely
to
> > be confusing.
> > 2) Add a token to attributes. For the nested case above, I could say
> > something like platform="#override# mac" or similar - indicate this
does not
> > merge with ancestor values. Feels clunky and likely to be painful to
use,
> > possibly to implement.
> > 3) Change the spec to make this optional - tools can implement cascade
with
> > or without merging, possibly through some tool option. Have not really
> > considered this fully, and could mean you get very different behavior
in
> > different apps.
> > 4) Add a new attribute in maps, something like cascade="merge |
nomerge".
> > Would likely leave this open to other values, with 2 (or more)
predefined
> > tokens - similar to how chunking works - allowing tools to expand their
> > support to new types of merging. Default could be the predefined token
> > "merge", to keep current behavior. Not sure if this attribute would
itself
> > cascade / override lower values, not fully thought out yet.
> >
> > At the moment I'm leaning towards the last option in that list. The
first
> > two seem too complex / difficult to use. The third I'd be willing to
> > consider but for now at least I think the goal is to have this a
> > standardized behavior, which pushes us to #4.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Robert D Anderson
> > IBM Authoring Tools Development
> > Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit (http://dita-ot.sourceforge.net/)
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> >
>
> --
> Eliot Kimber
> Senior Solutions Architect, RSI Content Solutions
> "Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together"
> Main: 512.554.9368
> www.rsicms.com
> www.rsuitecms.com
> Book: DITA For Practitioners, from XML Press,
> http://xmlpress.net/publications/dita/practitioners-1/
>



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