dita — archive
Groups - DITA Proposed Feature #12013 Referencing a range of elements (conrefrange.html) uploaded
I think the original intention of that statement was to ensure that the two target elements were siblings, so that you couldn’t conref to <li>s in two different lists or conref to unbalanced ranges. Michael brings up a good point though, that validation of the innards of the range must be ensured. Checking the parent element of both the source and the targets could provide this validation.
Another option would be to restrict all the element siblings in the range to be all of the same type e.g. all <li>s or all <step>s etc. This would prevent users from creating a conref to the following types of ranges (from x -> y):
<b id=”x”>Some bold text</b><mySpecialisedElement>Some non-bold </mySpecialisedElement> text<b id=”y”>More bold</b>
This is probably be too restrictive to be useful though.
Michael.
From: Michael Priestley [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: September 27, 2007 11:00
To: Grosso, Paul
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [dita] Groups - DITA Proposed Feature #12013 Referencing a range of elements (conrefrange.html) uploaded
> 1) "The user must only create ranges on target elements that
> share the same
> parent element. " -- Does this mean that a source range
> inside <body> can
> only be to a target inside <body>?
One reason for it to mean that would be to avoid situations like allowing conref of a range of elements into a context where only one of them is allowed, or where the range includes elements disallowed in the referencing context. If the parent elements are the same, then the rules of what's allowed in the range are the same.
With generalization-on-the-fly, the parent element of the range could be a specialization of the parent element of the reference, but it does seem to me that you'd get an important validity guarantee by comparing the parents in the range case. Otherwise conref-with-range would open up a world of referencing invalid content that conref currently prevents. In other words, without a check on the parent element, we would be dramatically loosening the constraints on what conref allows, in just this one place.
Speaking of which, I think Yas also mentioned:
>It is already possible to include invalid content
Is this true? It's definitely not the intent of conref. I thought it was doing a pretty good job of avoiding validation errors. What case were you thinking of?
Michael Priestley
Lead IBM DITA Architect
[email protected]
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25
"Grosso, Paul" <[email protected]>
09/27/2007 01:47 PM
To
cc
Subject
RE: [dita] Groups - DITA Proposed Feature #12013 Referencing a range of elements (conrefrange.html) uploaded
fwiw, a couple comments from me on Robert's email below.
>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] — [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Month Index] | [List Home]