Bruce Esrig <esrig-ia@esrig.com>

          11/19/2006 12:27 AM


To

Erik Hennum/Oakland/IBM@IBMUS, "Amber Swope" <amber.swope@xmetal.com>

cc

<dita@lists.oasis-open.org>

Subject

RE: [dita] bookmap specialization question

It is tempting to relax our ideal (in order to limit the work of the DITA TC) of specifying only a source language and not directly supporting processing.

Would we contemplate offering formal support for a convenience mechanism that defines processing based on templates?

Rather than requiring customization of processing by programming, it would be more convenient if customizers could declare a pseudo-topic with its sources and have those sources pulled together to form actual output.

A desperately-needed prerequisite would be a templating language that supports some simple layout ideas (a contradiction in terms?). At its most primitive, this could be a hybrid of conref-like constructs and FO-like directives.

The advantage would be that there would be a place to go when the need to customize crystallizes, short of reaching in to the implementation.

Best wishes,

Bruce

At 06:48 PM 11/17/2006, Erik Hennum wrote:
To
cc
Subject
To
cc
Subject
To
cc
Subject

GIF image



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]