[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Fwd: DITA 1.3 "XML mention" question
I attended the 8/7 webinar and had a question on the DITA Domains component of the presentation, in particular “XML mention”. I wasn’t sure how to direct this question to the TC so I hope you don’t mind that I’m emailing you directly.
So on to my question: I was wondering if the TC had considered the proposed naming of the XML mention markup “xmlelement” might be in conflict with the following (highlighted) portion of the XML TR:
[Definition: Each XML document contains one or more elements, the boundaries of which are either delimited by start-tags and end-tags, or, for empty elements, by an empty-element tag. Each element has a type, identified by name, sometimes called its "generic identifier" (GI), and may have a set of attribute specifications.] Each attribute specification has a name and a value.
This specification does not constrain the application semantics, use, or (beyond syntax) names of the element types and attributes,
except that names beginning with a match to
reserved for standardization in this or future versions of this specification.
My team here at LexisNexis has been using DITA for a few years now; we had designed a similar domain customization to delimit XML and PATH structures, and at first we similarly named these elements beginning with “xml…” but then reversed course when we realized that the XML TR mentioned that such naming is reserved.
Just wanted to bring this to your attention and curious to know if the TC had indeed considered this and to learn their rationale for whether there is a conflict or if there’s an allowable usage of an element name beginning with “xml” here.
Sr. Content Engineer
Jersey City, New Jersey