dita — archive
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
— [Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Month Index]
| [List Home]
Re: Values for @status on
I can’t see a reason to not allow unrestricted values.
The declaration should be NMTOKEN if the intent is to allow any single keyword value.
I can definitely see wanting values like “resolved”, “under-review”, “rejected”, etc.
—the usual review workflow states and status values.
Cheers, E. _____________________________________________ Eliot Kimber Sr Staff Content Engineer O: 512 554 9368 M: 512 554 9368 servicenow.com LinkedIn Twitter YouTube Facebook
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of kris eberleinconsulting.com <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 at 5:04 AM
To: DITA Technical Committee ([email protected]) <[email protected]>
Subject: [dita] Values for @status on <draft-comment> [External Email] The values for @status on <draft-comment> are currently limited to the following: changed deleted new unchanged -dita-use-conref-target This seems unnecessarily limiting. Is there a reason that we should not change to PCDATA? Also, is this limited set of tokens what is permitted for @status on other elements? How many of you all are aware of DITA implementations that have used @status? Best, Kris Kristen James Eberlein Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee Owner, Eberlein Consulting LLC [email protected]
Skype: kriseberlein; voice: +1 (919) 622-1501
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
— [Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Month Index]
| [List Home]