← Prev in month
← Prev in thread
Next in thread →
Next in month →
Issue summary for architectural spec from Eliot's notes
Eliot, here's my attempt to summarize architectural spec issues from your series of notes over the last week. Please let me know if I've missed something. Class attribute syntax - class attribute syntax mentions "module package" but doesn't define it current text: Each value has two parts: the first part identifies a module package, for example a topic type or domain package name, and the second part (after a / ) identifies an element type. Structural names are taken from the root element for the topic type or map type. Domain names are defined in the domain package. proposed text: Each value has two parts: the first part identifies a specialization module, for example a topic type or domain name, and the second part (after a / ) identifies an element type. Structural names are taken from the root element for the topic type or map type. Domain names are defined in the domain module. Limits of specialization > Map from customized document type to DITA - current text implies that element renaming cannot be done through specializaton - needs to be clearer current text: While specialization can be used to adapt document types for many different authoring purposes, there are some authoring requirements that cannot be met through specialization - particularly splitting or renaming attributes, and simple renaming of elements. proposed text (making clearer what "simple renaming" meant): While specialization can be used to adapt document types for many different authoring purposes, there are some authoring requirements that cannot be met through specialization, in particular, splitting or renaming attributes, or renaming elements through specialization without also specializing their containers. Limits of specialization > Customized subset document types for authoring - current text confuses compliance and conformance, reason for limitation unclear current text: Customized subset document types are not compliant with the DITA standard, and may not be supported by standards-compliant tools. proposed text: Customized subset document types are not conformant with the DITA standard, and may not be supported by standards-conformant tools. For example, if you customize document types to remove the <xref> element, you may not be able to use off-the-shelf DITA editors to create your content. Michael Priestley IBM DITA Architect and Classification Schema PDT Lead http://dita.xml.org/blog/25
← Prev in month
← Prev in thread
Next in thread →
Next in month →