Re: Values for @status on <draft-comment>

[Eliot Kimber <eliot.kimber@servicenow.com>]

I can’t see a reason to not allow unrestricted values. The declaration should be NMTOKEN if the intent is to allow any single keyword value.

 

I can definitely see wanting values like “resolved”, “under-review”, “rejected”, etc.—the usual review workflow states and status values.

 

Cheers,

 

E.

 

_____________________________________________

Eliot Kimber

Sr Staff Content Engineer

O: 512 554 9368

M: 512 554 9368

servicenow.com

LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube | Facebook

 

From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of kris eberleinconsulting.com <kris@eberleinconsulting.com>
Date: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 5:04 AM
To: DITA Technical Committee (dita@lists.oasis-open.org) <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] Values for @status on <draft-comment>

[External Email]

 

The values for @status on <draft-comment> are currently limited to the following:

• changed

• deleted
• new
• unchanged
• -dita-use-conref-target

 

This seems unnecessarily limiting. Is there a reason that we should not change to PCDATA? Also, is this limited set of tokens what is permitted for @status on other elements?

 

How many of you all are aware of DITA implementations that have used @status?

 

Best,

Kris

 

Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Owner, Eberlein Consulting LLC
kris@eberleinconsulting.com

Skype: kriseberlein; voice: +1 (919) 622-1501