Re: Property lists

I would say “Property table” not “properties table”.

I find one topic among the 35K in the ServiceNow Platform documentation for our upcoming release with <properties> and it is not actually published, so it must have been an experiment and therefore is not a useful example (it also has a separate <properties> element for each property, no idea why the author might have done that.

Cheers,

_____________________________________________

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: Wednesday, October 26, 2022 at 9:20 AM
To: DITA Technical Committee (dita@lists.oasis-open.org) <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] Property lists

[External Email]

I’m working through the reference elements topics. Of the 13 elements defined for the reference specialization, nine have to do with property lists/tables. A couple of questions:

The spec topics variously refer to property lists and property tables (and properties lists and properties tables – Sigh). I’d like to make this consistent. Do folks have a preference? The structure is specialized from <simpletable>, and we do mention that <properties> elements typically are formatted in a tabular format.
Do folks have any good examples? I confess that I (or my clients) rarely use <properties>. Most want to use simple table for simplicity and the possibility of using the table in other topic types.

Best,

Kris

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

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

dita message

[External Email]