[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Normative rule about @class and @specializations required on the root element of every topic and map
Hi, folk.
The draft DITA 2.0 spec currently has the following normative rule:
"The root element of every topic and map MUST declare the following attributes:
As part of the review of the proposal for "Relaxing specialization rules", we've had some commentary around this:
"If @specializations is only relevant to attribute specializations then I think it would be sensible to allow it to be omitted, with an omitted @specializations being equivalent to specializations="" (empty or whitespace-only value).
The counter to that approach is that you can't easily distinguish between really having no attribute specializations and just forgetting to provide @specializations, but in that case I think you'd get runtime failures if you actually had specializations that weren't declared (i.e., your @props specializations aren't recognized so things don't filter correctly).
Seems like an edge case in practice since DITA defines a number of out-of-the box attribute specializations, including now all of the original conditional attributes"
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]