Re: Contemplating sunsetting the xNAL domain

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

I strongly support moving xNAL out of the standard.

 

It’s simply hard to imagine that any enterprise other than possibly the original feature requestor actually uses it in DITA content.

 

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 Robert Anderson <robert.dan.anderson@oracle.com>
Date: Monday, March 27, 2023 at 12:19 PM
To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] Contemplating sunsetting the xNAL domain

[External Email]

 

---

As we scroll through the comments on the xNAL review, I wonder again if it might be worth moving the xNAL markup out of the standard and into the repository that will hold the updated learning-and-training, machinery, and other lesser-used grammar files that are not part of 2.0?

 

If we did that, it would drop 26 elements from the 2.0 tech-comm vocabulary. We've actually kept the grammar files up to date with DITA 2.0 during all of the changes, so that work is complete; if we just move it into the "dita-specializations" repository with the other grammar files, they will be ready to integrate with any conforming DITA 2.0 shell.

 

I'm curious to hear what others think about this one...

 

Thanks,

Robert