dita — archive

Re: Values for @status on

From: Zoe Lawson
To: [email protected]
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 13:45:00 -0000

How does @disposition interact with @status? Why are there both? (There's probably a really good reason, I'm just ignorant.) I am fine with making @status unrestricted. Zoë Lawson (she/her) From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Eliot Kimber <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2022 9:36:27 AM To: kris eberleinconsulting.com <[email protected]>; DITA Technical Committee ([email protected]) <[email protected]> Subject: [dita] Re: Values for @status on <draft-comment> 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