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: Inconsistency in markup + xml mention domains

Is anyone on the TC using keref on these elements, or has clients that use them? I have never used these elements and wonder if anyone else does… If we (the TC) are not aware of any keyref usage, I’d rather update the spec language and keep keyref out of them.





Gershon Joseph | Senior Information Architect | Precision Content 
Direct: +972 (54) 658-3887| Email: gershon@precisioncontent.com | www.precisioncontent.com


A picture containing drawing, food, plate

Description automatically generated


Unlock the Knowledge in Your Enterprise™

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. ©2021, Precision Content Authoring Solutions Inc, Toronto, Ontario, Canada



From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Robert Anderson <robert.dan.anderson@oracle.com>
Date: Friday, 21 May 2021 at 18:50
To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] Inconsistency in markup + xml mention domains



I've been making my way through the tech-comm updates making updates for DITA 2.0, and noticed an inconsistency in the DITA 1.3 spec. The <markupname> element (specialized from phrase) and the XML mention elements (7 elements specialized from <markupname>) all state that they use the universal attributes + outputclass + keyref:



However, in the DITA 1.3 vocabulary files, they don't define keyref:


We need to fix this for DITA 2.0. Either of these options is valid for the new release; should we:

  1. Add keyref to these elements (update 2.0 to match the 1.3 specification prose), or
  2. Remove keyref from the spec (update 2.0 to match the 1.3 grammar files)




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