On the other hand, Dana,
This logic could be applied to outlaw any extension, since
every user would have to review every document to determine whether they had
intended to use the extension.
With DITA 1.1, we clarify that an indexterm designates a
point at which to start reading about the indexed subject. The DITA 1.1 conceit
is that this was true all along. In DITA 1.0, this aspect of the interpretation
was unspecified because there was no way to specify anything else. But if it
even makes sense to take sides on this, it's possible to argue that the default
disambiguation is the DITA 1.1 way. Indexing practice typically presumes that an
index entry refers to a point at which to start reading.
For those who wish to specify a range of
pages possibly not starting at the top of a topic, a new capability is
provided that permits such a specification. The specification of a range
generates a page range in outputs that have page numbers, such as PDF files. In
other outputs, it generates a reference to the start page
only.
Best wishes,
Bruce Esrig
From: Dana Spradley
[mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006
12:41 PM
To:
Subject: [dita] Are
indexterm ranges backwards incompatible?
After this morning's meeting, I'm starting to
think that maybe ranged indexterm should be considered backwards incompatible
with DITA 1.0.
In 1.0, it is ambiguous whether indexterms point to
discussions confined to a single page, or to extended discussions that begin
on a certain page.
Introducing ranged indexterms removes that
ambiguity.
Users who want to make use of ranged indexterms would need
to go back through their entire document set and replace current point
indexterms with ranged indexterms where appropriate - otherwise any new ranged
indexterms they add would cause these old point indexterms to be
misinterpreted.
Doesn't that amount to backwards
incompatibility?
--Dana
