We certainly use xmlelement and xmlatt in our internal information model documentation. Can't say that we use any others from the domain.
HTH,
--Scott
_____________________________________________
Scott Hudson
Staff Content Engineer, Product Content Engineering
From: <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Gershon Joseph <gershon@precisioncontent.com>
Date: Sunday, May 23, 2021 at 3:37 AM
To: Robert Anderson <robert.dan.anderson@oracle.com>, "dita@lists.oasis-open.org" <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] Re: Inconsistency in markup + xml mention domains
[External Email]
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 doesâ If we (the TC) are not aware of any keyref usage, Iâd rather update the spec language and
keep keyref out of them.
Gershon
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. Â2021, 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
Hi,
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:
-
Add keyref to these elements (update 2.0 to match the 1.3 specification prose), or
-
Remove keyref from the spec (update 2.0 to match the 1.3 grammar files)
Thanks,
Robert