I prefer the more verbose.
Gershon Joseph | Senior Information Architect | Precision Content
Direct: +972 (54) 658-3887| Email: gershon@precisioncontent.com |
www.precisioncontent.com
Unlock the Knowledge in Your Enterpriseâ
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Please
notify us by return email if you have received this email in error. Â2020,
Precision Content Authoring Solutions Inc, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
From: <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Robert Anderson <robert.dan.anderson@oracle.com>
Date: Tuesday, 1 September 2020 at 0:21
To: "dita@lists.oasis-open.org" <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] Stage 3 proposal: split syntax diagrams from programming domain
Iâm attaching the Stage 3 proposal for issue 361 to split syntax diagrams (and now syntax phrases) from the programming domain.
Thanks to Deb and Frank for reviews. Frank noted one thing, which is that the domain token (syntaxdiagram-d) is more verbose than many of the original ones (such as âpr-dâ that it used to have). I tend to
link the more verbose ones better in this case, and it follows the pattern of more recent domain tokens, such as âditavalref-dâ. We should discuss whether others prefer a more abbreviated token in this case.
Thanks,
Robert