dita — archive

Issue: glossary.dtd does not conform to 1.2 spec filenaming rules

From: Gershon Joseph
To: [email protected]
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 09:55:00 -0000

Further to Eliot's comment: "It's primarily with the modules--the spec currently doesn't require shells to have any particular name, although the convention of making the shell the same as the topic type is pretty well established." So maybe we should close this hole in the 1.2 spec and add this convention along with all the others we've already added in 1.2? Seems silly to me to suggest conventions for everything else and not suggest any for the shell name. I also agree with Eliot that if the glossary vs. glossentry caused him pain, it's likely to trip up others too. I vote for the bug fix Eliot suggests. I've had the same concerns about the confusion of "glossary" shell being driven by a