dita — archive

Allowed locations for

From: Graydon Saunders <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 18:30:00 -0000

I'm not seeing a lot of location differences between the proposed options. I'd still prefer to have <example> available in these locations, and prefer the actual element to adding a note @type. Agreed on adding an element rather than a note type. For the Stage 1 proposal, I'm not suggesting that we change <example> to be specialized from <fig> or <div>, but add it to the same locations, keeping the existing locations where it is allowed today. I will admit to wanting to keep <example> out of <desc> since I don't think <desc> is appropriately a generic block container. I don't think we should go with example-in-example. Were we to otherwise go with "where found today" and "like fig", we'd have: < abstract > , < body > , < bodydiv > , < conbody > , < conbodydiv > , < dd > , < div > , < draft - comment > , < entry > , < fn > , < itemgroup > , < li > , < lq > , < note > , < p > , < pd > , < refbody > , < refbodydiv > , < section > , < secti ondiv > , < stentry > , < taskbody > as elements which may contain example. Graydon Saunders Publishing Solutions Developer Precision Content Direct: +1 (647)265-8500 x106 Email: [email protected] www.precisioncontent.com Unlock the Knowledge in Your Enterprise™ This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Please notify us by return email if you have received this email in error. ©2019, Precision Content Authoring Solutions Inc, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Scott Hudson <[email protected]> Sent: 16 July 2019 12:41 To: [email protected] Subject: [dita] Allowed locations for <example> Here is a list of the elements that example could be contained by (by scenario): <example> akin to <fig>: <abstract> , <body> , <bodydiv> , <dd> , <div> , <draft-comment> , <entry> , <example> , <fn> , <itemgroup> , <li> , <lq> , <note> , <p> , <section> , <sectiondiv> , <stentry> <pd> <conbody> add @type="example" to <note>: <abstract> , <body> , <bodydiv> , <dd> , <desc> , <div> , <draft-comment> , <entry> , <example> , <fig> , <figgroup> , <fn> , <itemgroup> , <li> , <linkinfo> , <lq> , <p> , <section> , <sectiondiv> , <stentry> <equation-figure> , <pd> <conbody> <example> akin to <div>: <abstract> , <body> , <bodydiv> , <dd> , <desc> , <div> , <draft-comment> , <entry> , <example> , <fig> , <figgroup> , <fn> , <itemgroup> , <li> , <linkinfo> , <lq> , <note> , <p> , <section> , <sectiondiv> , <stentry> <equation-figure> , <pd> <conbody> <example> today: <body> , <conbody> , <conbodydiv> , <refbody> , <refbodydiv> , <taskbody> I'm not seeing a lot of location differences between the proposed options. I'd still prefer to have <example> available in these locations, and prefer the actual element to adding a note @type. For the Stage 1 proposal, I'm not suggesting that we change <example> to be specialized from <fig> or <div>, but add it to the same locations, keeping the existing locations where it is allowed today. The content model of example would remain the same as well. Thanks and best regards, --Scott Scott Hudson Content Technology Strategist, DS&A Information and Knowledge Services Jeppesen, A Boeing Company 55 Inverness Drive East Englewood, CO 80112 303-328-6228 Cell: 303-350-7934 http://www.jeppesen.com