I vote for one level of specialization
in Lightweight DITA. I have no use case for it. It seems like if
you want that much specialization you should use full DITA.
Mark Giffin
Mark Giffin Consulting, Inc.
http://markgiffin.com/
On 6/26/2016 5:59 PM, Michael Priestley wrote:
OK I've had one vote
on this, saying they
don't need multi-level specialization.
Anyone else have input?
Do the learning and training
specializations
depend on more than one level?
Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
Enterprise Content Technology Strategist
http://dita.xml.org/blog/michael-priestley
From:
Michael
Priestley/Toronto/IBM
To:
Date:
06/14/2016 01:35 PM
Subject:
Do we need
multi-level
specialization?
In our last call we were
struggling
with how to represent multiple levels of inheritance in
Lightweight DITA,
especially in non-XML forms like HTML5 and Markdown.
But backing up a bit, Don asked
the
question: do we even really need multiple levels in Lightweight?
Do we have any examples where
multi-level
specialization would be required? That is, any examples where a
specialization
would need to be based off another existing specialization,
rather than
off of elements in topic or map.
Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
Enterprise Content Technology Strategist
http://dita.xml.org/blog/michael-priestley
