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] Default values for @domains within specializations

I agree--not a useful rule.


Eliot Kimber, Owner
Contrext, LLC

On 2/23/15, 4:16 PM, "Robert D Anderson" <robander@us.ibm.com> wrote:

>In going through the coding requirements for DTDs, Kris found a
>requirement from 1.2 (and earlier) that we think should be removed.
>However, it involves normative language, so we want to run it by the TC
>When coding structural specializations, the spec states that modules must
>define the included-domains parameter entity. This is usually empty but
>in some cases must have a meaningful default. See the (very short) rules
>and examples here:
>Why is this meaningless? Every specialization, whether topic or map,
>structural or domain, builds on either the core topic module or the core
>map module. Both of those modules define the included-domains entity:
><!ENTITY included-domains
>  ""
>When building a DTD, specialized modules must come after more general
>modules -- so every module comes after either topic or map. Within a DTD,
>the first definition wins. Thus, the required definition in a specialized
>module can never have any effect - the first definition from topic.mod or
>map.mod always wins.
>I think the straightforward change is to just remove this language, but
>as with other normative rules, the TC should sign off or quietly nod in
>approval before it goes away.
>Related: these entities were present in all of the 1.2 modules except the
>SubjectScheme map specialization. Each of the declarations was empty, and
>had no effect. They are not in the 1.3 modules we have in SVN now. Last
>year when I was comparing the output of Eliot's RNG->DTD tool with the
>actual shipped 1.2, I noted that extra definitions of the entity were
>missing, and I couldn't figure out why. This is why - the tool
>(reasonably) does not add the meaningless extra definition.
>Robert D Anderson
>IBM Authoring Tools Development
>Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit (http://www.dita-ot.org/)

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