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] Release Management Domain: Must apply to maps as well as topics

Title: [dita] Release Management Domain: Must apply to maps as well as topics

Hi Folks.


Yes, including the change domain in a map was absolutely intended. Here is an excerpt from the original draft in the wiki:


“This section details the proposed markup modifications. 1) create a new "changehistory" domain that can be integrated by map and topic shells 2) re-factor bookmap.mod to specify some elements in a separate domain (so this can be used by bookmap). 3) specify required and optional processing expectations”


Good catch, Eliot.


Also note that we predicted changes required to bookmap. I don’t recall whether the SC included this work in the proposal or determined that it was unnecessary. I can do some research if needed.





From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:dita@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of JoAnn Hackos
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 11:16 AM
To: Hudson, Scott
Cc: Eliot Kimber; dita
Subject: Re: [dita] Release Management Domain: Must apply to maps as well as topics


We need to hear from Tom Cihak.

Sent from my iPad

JoAnn Hackos

Comtech Services Inc

710 Kipling Street Suite 400

Lakewood CO 80215


Comtech Logo 2005 small


CIDM will be hosting the Content Management Strategies/DITA North America conference in April 2013. 

On Mar 8, 2014, at 9:14 PM, "Hudson, Scott" <Scott.Hudson@schneider-electric.com> wrote:

Sounds reasonable to me.


Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 8, 2014, at 2:55 PM, "Eliot Kimber" <ekimber@contrext.com> wrote:

Proposal 13102 as written says:

"enables content workers to log comments and metadata at the topic level
when changes are made."

The implicit restriction to topics is not necessary: there's no reason not
to allow revision history within maps and no technical reason to not use
it within maps (that is, <metadata>, the specialization base of
<change-historylist>, is allowed within <topicmeta>, so the domain is
inherently allowable within maps).

I take this to be a simple oversight on the part of the original proposers
who were focused on topic-specific use cases. I can't see any reason not
to allow the domain within maps and can think of times when I would want
to use it in maps.

Does the TC object to adjusting the spec language to explicitly allow use
of the domain within maps (which also implies integrating the domain in
all non-base map types in addition to the non-base topic types already
indicated in the proposal).



Eliot Kimber, Owner
Contrext, LLC

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:

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.

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