Re: [dita] Bookmaps and booklists

Indeed! Replace is what I should have usedâ

Thanks,

--Scott

From: Magliery Tom <tom.magliery@justsystems.com>
Date: Monday, August 13, 2018 at 3:34 PM
To: Scott Hudson <scott.hudson@jeppesen.com>
Cc: Ãric Sirois <eric.sirois@ixiasoft.com>, DITA TC <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: Re: [dita] Bookmaps and booklists

Side note: We're eschewing "deprecate" for DITA 2.0, so the actual proposal in this case would be to *replace* the amendments element with amendlist. There are appropriate sections in the proposal template in which we would describe what would be required for migration.

mag

On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Scott Hudson <scott.hudson@jeppesen.com> wrote:

What if we deprecated the <amendments> element and created a new <amendlist> that followed the similar content model of the other <booklist> elements?

Â

Then you could still move the functionality, without the content model issues?

Â

--Scott

Â

From: <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Ãric Sirois <eric.sirois@ixiasoft.com>
Date: Monday, August 13, 2018 at 3:12 PM
To: DITA TC <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] Bookmaps and booklists

Â

Hi,

Â

I have been having a discussion with Eliot and Kris about some f the changes to bookmap for DITA 2.0, specifically the amendments update.Â The issue at hand is that while the update is doable with RNG and XSD, we will have issues when converting them to DTDs.Â So if we wanted to support this in 2.0, we would need two different elements to differentiate the booklists from the backmatter and the frontmatter.Â ÂAs well there is Scottâs note about revision history in booklists as well that we need to discuss.

Â

Here is a snippet of the discussion:

Â

<snip author=âEricâ>

Iâm working on the changes to bookmap for DITA 2.0 and one change we wanted to do was to move <amendments> into <booklists>.Â Thatâs easily doable with RNG and XSD, but no so much with DTDs and likely the reason why it's designed that way in the current DTDs.Â The concern that I have at the moment is that when we do an RNG to DTD conversion, we are going to run into the same issue again because itâs not technically feasible in the DTD world unless Iâm missing something.Â

Â

The technical issue is that the content model for booklists front matter would be different than the content model for booklists in the backmatter.Â If we canât get the design we want to work in the DTD world, then I think we should leave things as is for DITA 2.0.

</smip>

Â

<snip author=âEliotâ>

The RNG must conform to DTD constraints, unfortunately, so a given element must have the same content model everywhere it is used. That means booklists has to be a union of everything that would be wanted at the front or back of a manual or you would need two different booklist element types in order to have different content models. That seems like a reasonable solution, e.g. âbooklists-frontmatterâ, âbooklists-backmatterâ. Ideally, we would have a domain that defines the abstract base type from which specific booklist specializations would be derived (i.e., move current booklists to a domain and then use that domain as the basis for whatever specialized booklists you need). But I realize that goes beyond the current remit for BookMap 2.0.

</snip>

Â

Â

Kind regards,

Â

Â

Ãric Sirois

DITA Toolsmithâ

Â

IXIASOFTÂ

825 Querbes, Suite 200, MontrÃal, QuÃbec, Canada, H2V 3X1

tel Â+ 1 514 279-4942 Â/ Âtoll free + 1 877 279-4942

mobile + 1 647 462-3620

eric.sirois@ixiasoft.com / www.ixiasoft.comÂ

Â

Â

dita message