Hi Rob/Ian,
Your use cases are valid. But I think both are narrow enough that
one should use full DITA to meet these requirements, even in the
presence of a LwDITA alternative.
I take this position because of my perception that the
"Lightweight" portion of Lightweight DITA is at general risk from
feature creep.
-Alan
On 3/31/17 8:46 AM, Rob Hanna wrote:
In
my opinion, the @href is quite useful as the semantic that
states what the data’s @name and @value applies to. It can
apply to an external or internal resource. For example
To
relate a topic to an external resource for pulling in the
latest pricing for a widget
@name
= “msrp”
@value
= “widget_canada”
@href
=
"" moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://widgetRUS.salesforce.com/pricelist">http://widgetRUS.salesforce.com/pricelist
To
relate a piece of data to an element within the topic
itself
@name
= “correction”
@value
= “Changed the trade name used for the Widget sold in
Canada”
@href
= "">
Arguably,
the @href value can be inserted using a nested data element.
Still I believe that the semantic relevance of @href in data
is very useful.
Cheers,
Rob
Hanna
From:
[mailto:] On
Behalf Of Alan Houser
Sent: March 31, 2017 5:21 AM
To:
Subject: Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] Does
<data> need @href?
Gently pushing back on this ... if "is it in DITA 1.3?" were
the test for inclusion in Lw-DITA, well ...
What can an @href attribute accomplish that @name/@value
cannot? I acknowledge that @href has processing implications
in full DITA. If that's the driving requirement here, I can
accept that. But (generally), if one can meet a requirement in
Lw-DITA with more general/extensible markup (in this case,
@name/@value), I would favor punting the more specific markup.
-Alan
