Gershon, I think one important consideration here is that DITA supports both of the following grammar mechanisms:
- DTD
- RNG
Because we need to select one grammar mechanism to be normative, we selected RNG. What that really means is that – if there is a difference between the grammars, the RNG version is what is correct and definitive.
Background and context for folks:
- DITA 1.0-1.2: We supported both DTD and XSD. DTD was normative
- DITA 1.3: We introduced support for RNG and selected it as the normative grammar.
- DITA 2.0: We drop support for XSD, but continue supporting DTD. RNG is the normative grammar.
Best,
Kris
Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Owner, Eberlein Consulting LLC
kris@eberleinconsulting.com
Skype: kriseberlein; voice: +1 (919) 622-1501
From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
On Behalf Of Gershon Joseph
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 8:35 AM
To: dita <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] DTD examples in DITA 2.0 spec if RNG is normative
Hi all,
While reviewing the specialization, expansion, et al chapter it occurred to me that the spec is made more difficult to read because we talk to DTD grammar as well as RNG grammar. I feel very strongly that if RNG is the normative
schema language, we should remove all DTD explanations and examples from the spec. This will greatly simply the 2.0 spec for the intended audience. If we keep all the DTD stuff, we should make DTD normative and remove the RNG stuff. My vote is to keep RNG
normative and remove DTD stuff. RNG was designed for grammar development and maintenance, so let’s use it for its designed purpose.
At Precision Content, we deliver a generated DTD or XSD file that’s a single grammar file that captures the specialized grammar. It’s 100% DITA, but not in the various modules because we have our own tool to design and manage the content
models. My thinking here is that we could develop a tool (or continue to develop Eliot’s tool) that converts RNG to DTD and XSD, but without the current behavior where we try to preserve the full module architecture of the original. Think of the resulting
XSD or DTD as a throw-away file used to feed into the CCMS, XML editor, and other processors in the content lifecycle, but NOT to use as a source for further grammar development. All future grammar development of a specialization should continue to be done
from the RNG source. Most XML editors on the market today prefer XSD and are more than happy to digest a single XSD file that captures the result of combining the topic or map shell and all its modules into a single grammar file. The result is equivalent to
the original RNG or DTD file sets, but overcome the limitations of XSD when trying to mimic the RNG or DTD module architecture. If users maintain their specializations in RNG and have a way to generate an XSD or DTD file that captures all the nuances in the
RNG source, then I see no need for the spec to devote so much space to the DTD architecture.
If the TC members feel strongly enough about preserving the DTD stuff, at least for an interim period, I am willing to drive a committee note that explains, in DTD grammar, each RNG architecture discussion and related examples. I think
2.0 is a good time to rid ourselves of the arcane DTD grammar, at least from the spec itself, but keep it documented for the brave few who still want to use it.
A side benefit of this approach, assuming we are able to develop the RNG to DTD/XSD thing, would be easier adoption, because we would provide a reliable and easy way to get the RNG grammar into the XSD or DTD that the tools use.
Thoughts?
Gershon
Gershon L Joseph |
Senior Information Architect | Precision Content | Phone: +972 (54) 658-3887|
TZ: Jerusalem, Israel (GMT+2) | Email: gershon@precisioncontent.com|
Twitter: @PCASinc |
www.precisioncontent.com
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.
© 2022, Precision Content Authoring Solutions Inc. Toronto, Ontario, Canada
|
gershon joseph |
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
||
