[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] Review #2 comments: DITAVAL elements
At a minimum the change should be from SHOULD to MAY as Seth recommends. Cheers, E. ————— Eliot Kimber, Owner Contrext, LLC http://contrext.com On 11/3/14, 11:07 AM, "seth.park@freescale.com" <seth.park@freescale.com> wrote: >As a DITA (and DITA-OT) user, this processor feedback is extremely >important to me. > >In my world, we build maps of topics and maps assembled by different >teams using different workflows. Keeping my ditaval file up-to-date with >the prop usage is > crucial to avoid creating an incorrect rendition (due to filtering >problems). (For the record, I know how subjectScheme could help me >proactively manage this issue, but we’ve not been able to implement it in >our environment.) > >If I process my top map with a ditaval file and someone else has included >an unknown prop (or misspelled the prop value), then I need to know about >it. > > >As a DITA user, I will insist that any DITA processor provide this >feedback, so having something in the spec that calls attention to this >usecase seems like a > good thing. > >Perhaps we can just say “may” instead of “should” as a way of implying >the need to tool developers? > >-seth > > > > > >From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:dita@lists.oasis-open.org] >On Behalf Of Kristen James Eberlein >Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2014 9:07 AM >To: DITA TC >Subject: [dita] Review #2 comments: DITAVAL elements > > > >Referring another comment to the TC for discussion: > >Topic = DITAVAL elements >DITAweb URL: >http://ditaweb.com/oasis-dita/#/00074601-DA$00074098-DB$DITAVAL ><http://ditaweb.com/oasis-dita/#/00074601-DA$00074098-DB$DITAVAL> elements > >Prose in question: > >Notes on ditaval messages >Conditional processing code should provide a report of any attribute >values encountered in content that do not have an explicit action >associated with them. > >Comments: > >* >Eliot Kimber: "I think this needs to clarify that specifying an attribute >with no value constitutes an explicit action. Currently the OT will >report attribute values that are defaulted to exclude via prop elements. >It should not." >* >Robert Anderson: "I'm finding this whole sentence somewhat questionable. >I'm not sure the spec should be forcing applications to do this. >Referring to TC for thoughts." > >-- >Best, >Kris > >Kristen James Eberlein >Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee >Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting >www.eberleinconsulting.com <http://www.eberleinconsulting.com> >+1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype) > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ><https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]