Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] Footnote desired in LW DITA?

Got me. I was thinking of the HTML5 element <footer> when
      "footnote" was mentioned. But my concern was nevertheless the
      same--I wanted to make sure that "fn" and "footnote" in our
      discussion both meant the same DITA thing, and not as the
      placeholder <footer> of HTML5 (which can certainly hold the
      result of processing a DITA fn element).

      

      So now you have me wondering about the role of <aside> in
      HDITA. Offhand I don't recall that you've mapped it as an HDITA
      structure, but please remind me if you have. I think HTML5's
      section and div elements are close enough surrogates for DITA's
      body structures, but now I'm not sure what DITA's <fn>
      should map to--maybe <aside> now that I'm refocused on your
      viewpoint.  I need to review my conclusions originally in this
      presentation:
http://www.slideshare.net/donrday/cm-strategies-dita-north-america-2013-don-daymapping-dita-to-html5

    
--

    
Don

    

    

    
On 4/15/2016 7:56 PM, Michael Priestley
      wrote:

    

    Hi Don,

      

      Going back to this email because
        I had
        some questions - where you thinking of the HTML5 <aside>
        element
        when you talked about HTML5 footnotes?

      

      HTML5 doesn't appear to have a
        footnote
        element, unless it's in a side recommendation somewhere I'm not
        seeing:

      https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/common-idioms.html#footnotes

      

      If we implement <fn> in
        LWD, what
        would we map it to in HTML5? The <aside> element is
        probably easiest
        to map from a structural equivalency perspective but would need
        extra processing
        to display as a footnote.

      

      https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/common-idioms.html#footnotes

      

        Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)

        Enterprise Content Technology Strategist

        

      http://dita.xml.org/blog/michael-priestley

      

      

      

      From:      
         Don Day
        <>

      To:      
         

      Date:      
         04/01/2016 03:28 PM

      Subject:    
           Re:
        [dita-lightweight-dita]
        Footnote desired in LW DITA?

      Sent by:    
           <>

      

      

      

      Jan, this list IS a sounding board for ideas. Our
        discussion
        format is less rigorous than an RFE or RFC item, and Michael
        tends to use
        a consensus approach to closure on things. With that, let the
        debate begin.

        

        And after thinking at length about how HTML5's <footnote>
        element
        might inform on content model, I realized finally that your
        question may
        have been about current DITA's <fn> element, which is not
        yet in
        lightweight DITA. This element IS an archetype-level element
        that finds
        many uses in specializations. As we look to adding things back
        in later
        on in the LwD process, I agree that this element deserves
        consideration.

        

        When I think of a topic architecture, I look for structures that
        underpin
        many common instances. Is a particular item an instance, or an
        archetype
        or architectural feature? The archetypes and architectural
        features go
        into the core, the instances go into the specializations.

        

        <fn> and <indexterm> (a bird of a feather) are
        archetypes that
        uniquely contain relocatable content. Generally we place
        these elements
        inline for context but render their content elsewhere
        (contrasted with
        referenceable content, content from elsewhere that gets
        rendered
        at the point of reference). I think they are essential in a full
        implementation.
        Granted, it is hard to train writers to think of content as
        objects rather
        than instances, but this is a case where indirection provides
        great capability
        for the types of queries and renditions that will drive future
        content
        delivery.

        

        So if this is the case of "footnote" that you requested, then
        I am fully with you. I suspect that Michael will refocus on the
        adequateness
        of inner content models once we finish the overall structure.

      -- 

      Don
              R. Day

          Founding Chair, OASIS
              DITA Technical Committee

          LinkedIn: donrday   Twitter:
        @donrday

          About.me: Don
              R. Day   Skype:
          don.r.day
        
      
"Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?

          Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"

          --T.S. Eliot 

        

        

        On 3/30/2016 5:01 AM, Jan Benedictus wrote:

        HI all.

            

            While migrating sample content to Lw DITA to test the new
            Marketing specialization,
            we ran into the limitation that there is no footnote in the
            schema. I understand
            that 'scope-creep' is always a risk, but still it feels that
            a footnote
            is a pretty versatile requirement? It wouldn t feel logical
            to put this
            in a specialization?

            

            I am not sure if this is the right way to express such
            findings, so  my
            second question is more procedure-related: what is the
            correct way to communicate
            such RFC's?

            

            Cheers!

            Jan

        

        
        
          
            

              

              
              Virus-free.
                www.avast.com
            

          
        
        

        

        

      

    
    

    
-- 

      
      

        Don R. Day

        Founding Chair, OASIS
          DITA Technical Committee

        LinkedIn: donrday   Twitter:
        @donrday

        About.me: Don R. Day   Skype:
        don.r.day
      

      

        "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?

        Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"

        --T.S. Eliot 
      

    

  

	

        
		Virus-free. www.avast.com