[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] comments on 12050 plus longdescref proposal
> -----Original Message----- > From: Robert D Anderson [mailto:robander@us.ibm.com] > Sent: Tuesday, 2007 July 10 9:57 > To: Michael Priestley > Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: [dita] comments on 12050 plus longdescref proposal > > Paul (probably working with Jeff?) - that was a great write > up. I only have > a couple of general comments on top of what Michael said: > > You've got the comment that "The topicref element has yet a different > definition for href (even though most of its specializations > use either the > standard definition or Alternative href definition #1)." I think the > suggested updates for topicref/@href are appropriate - and > should also be > applied to those specializations, except where called out > elsewhere in this > document. For example, the TOC element and other lists have a > different > definition that would not be impacted. So the abbrevlist, bibliolist, etc. elements will remain as in the 12050 proposal, but the following specializations of topicref: amendments, appendix, bookabstract, chapter, colophon, dedication, draftintro, notices, part, preface would be (logically) "moved" from the "Elements using the "standard" definitions of href, format, scope, and type" into a set that all use the topicref's description of href. I'll modify 12050 accordingly. > > For authorinformation, the type attribute value should match > that specified > on author (given that authorinformation is a specialization > of author). I'll modify 12050 accordingly. paul
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]