[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] Re: Inconsistency in markup + xml mention domains
We certainly use xmlelement and xmlatt in our internal information model documentation. Can't say that we use any others from the domain.
Staff Content Engineer, Product Content Engineering
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.
Unlock the Knowledge in Your Enterpriseâ
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: