Re: [dita] Question about domains attribute

[Robert D Anderson <robander@us.ibm.com>]

OK - to try and narrow down into specific cases:

In DITA 1.1, if I specialize map and add no domains, what should @domains be? Is the empty string correct?

In DITA 1.3, for a map with no specializations or constraints, I now see that you've got the "(map map)" token in the RNG (not in the DTD, which is what I originally checked). I assume those were added with a 1.3 proposal, but I do not remember seeing them previously - I thought tokens were only added for specializations. To me, a value of (map map) means "map specialized from map", so it seems ... odd. If anything, I'd have expected just (map) as the token.

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

Eliot Kimber ---10/03/2014 15:10:10---Yes, @domains without structural types is valid but incomplete. The map and topic modules have domai

From: Eliot Kimber <ekimber@contrext.com>
To: Robert D Anderson/Rochester/IBM@IBMUS
Cc: DITA TC <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: 10/03/2014 15:10
Subject: Re: [dita] Question about domains attribute
Sent by: <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>

---

Yes, @domains without structural types is valid but incomplete.

The map and topic modules have domains contributions defined in the RNG
modules but they're not being put into the generated DTDs: that's
definitely a bug that I will fix--they should be there for completeness.

For the statement "DITA document types are defined via the @domains
attribute" to be true, the @domains value must list structural types in
addition to @domains.

Cheers,

E.
—————
Eliot Kimber, Owner
Contrext, LLC
http://contrext.com




On 10/3/14, 2:52 PM, "Robert D Anderson" <robander@us.ibm.com> wrote:

>Ah, of course. That said - I didn't think that the base topic or map had
>domain tokens? They do not appear in the DITA 1.3 document types (I'm
>looking at base topic and base map, which use the fewest domains). So if
>I want a new shell for base map -- what value is legal or required for
>@domains in DITA 1.* on the <map> element, when using no specializaations
>of any kind, and using no constraints?
>
>For the case that was causing me trouble - the structural specialization
>and shell DTD were created back in the days of DITA 1.1, so we did not
>have a structural domain token. I can create that token now and bypass
>the error. Still, it's not an absolute requirement - as you say, it's
>strongly urged, but not a MUST for exactly this reason - I believe my
>shell DTD was valid in DITA 1.1, and should remain valid in 1.2 and 1.3.
>
>Robert D Anderson
>IBM Authoring Tools Development
>Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit (http://dita-ot.sourceforge.net/)
>
>Eliot Kimber <ekimber@contrext.com> wrote on 10/03/2014 14:33:02:
>
>> From: Eliot Kimber <ekimber@contrext.com>
>> To: Robert D Anderson/Rochester/IBM@IBMUS, DITA TC
>><dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
>> Date: 10/03/2014 14:33
>> Subject: Re: [dita] Question about domains attribute
>> 
>> Starting with DITA 1.2 we strongly urged @domains to list all structural
>> types as well as domains, so the minimum @domains value should be
>>"(topic
>> topic)" or "(map map)" in the case where you have no domains integrated.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> E.
>> —————
>> Eliot Kimber, Owner
>> Contrext, LLC
>> http://contrext.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/3/14, 2:21 PM, "Robert D Anderson" <robander@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >The DITA spec is pretty clear that structural specializations need to
>> >declare @domains on the root element (specialization of map or topic),
>> >and that this attribute must describe the domains used in a given
>> >document type shell. The spec says of this attribute: "...the @domains
>> >attribute, whose value is a sequence of parenthesized module ancestry
>> >specifications. "
>> >http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.2/os/spec/archSpec/domainsatt.html
>> >
>> >The question is - what about if I have a document type shell with no
>> >domains? I've got a very simple map specialization - mostly a title,
>> >metadata, and very limited references to other maps. There is no need
>>for
>> >any domains. I've declared the attribute for my root element, but in my
>> >DTD file the attribute is set to the empty string (""). This would not
>> >appear to comply with the language above, because the empty string is
>>not
>> >a sequence of parenthesized modules. Is it correct to set this to the
>> >empty string? I've got a tool that reports an error here because
>>@domains
>> >does not match the current definition. I can get around the error by
>> >setting a value like "none" or "(none)" but those clearly do not comply
>> >either.
>> >
>> >So - what is the correct value for @domains in a document type shell
>>that
>> >does not use any domains?
>> >
>> >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