dita message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: DITA namespace?
- From: Michael Priestley <mpriestl@ca.ibm.com>
- To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 12:10:43 -0500
There are a lot of tools that depend
on namespace to associate a document with its schema or processing. DITA
doesn't have a namespace right now, but we probably do need one. The issues
are:
1.-would new namespaced content be backwards
compatible with tools and editors?
2. could processing handle a mix of
namespaced and non-namespaced DITA content?
3. what do we tell specializers
to do?
In an ideal world, it would be nice
to have a separate namespace for every DITA specialization: but the issue
we had with that in our previous discussion was the usability of a compound
document that would include so many different namespaces, and the inability
to default more than one of them.
If we can answer 1 and 2 in the positive,
maybe the position for 1.1 could be:
- provide a single "dita"
namespace for all base DITA markup (eg topic, task, concept, reference,
various domains)
- if necessary, provide an un-namespaced
version as well, for backwards compatibility with any existing tools/implementations
- tell specializers to either create
their specializations in the existing "dita" namespace, or in
no namespace, or in their own namespace, at their discretion (as long as
the result can still be processed and edited as DITA topics based on class
attributes etc.)
And defer to the future the question
of whether we can overcome the technical and usability challenges involved
in synchronizing namespaces and design modules in DITA, ie having the topic
type or domain name as the automatic namespace for any specialization.
Michael Priestley
IBM DITA Architect
Classification Schema PDT Lead
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]