[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] Groups - Issue #12038 - Proposal: Acronyms and other Abbreviated Forms (IssueNumbe12038.html) uploaded
> -----Original Message----- > From: Ogden, Jeff > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 9:06 AM > To: 'dita@lists.oasis-open.org' > Subject: RE: [dita] Groups - Issue #12038 - Proposal: Acronyms and other > Abbreviated Forms (IssueNumbe12038.html) uploaded > > Some questions and comments on this proposal. > > Is @id required on the abbreviated-form specialization or is the id just > used to make the element conrefable? > > Does the use of the abbreviated-form specialization require the use of > conref or is that just the likely or recommended way that authors will use > it? > > Is first or not first use determined using the @id on abbreviated-form > specialization or by pattern matching against some of the abbreviated-form > element's contents? If pattern matching, which content is used? > > Are any of <expanded>, <short>, <surface-form> required within the > abbreviated-form specialization? Can <expanded>, <short>, <surface-form> > be used outside of the abbreviated-form specialization? If they can be > used outside of abbreviated-form, the names seem too generic. > > I don't understand this statement "The abbreviated form element is > designed to be extended via specialization to reflect the actual form of > abbreviation, for example: . . .". Does the example show a specialized > version of the abbreviated-form element? > > The proposal is designed around an inline content model rather than a > definition and reference model. Would a definition and reference model > work better? > > How will this work for fallback generalization? Will the expanded and > surface-form content both be included in the output and the short form > omitted? > > Are these specializations to be included in a new domain specialization, > an existing domain specialization and, if so, which one, or somewhere > else? > > Would this be available for use in all of the "standard" DITA topic types? > In map types? > > -Jeff > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: gljoseph@yahoo.com [mailto:gljoseph@yahoo.com] > > Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2007 3:08 AM > > To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org > > Subject: [dita] Groups - Issue #12038 - Proposal: Acronyms and other > > Abbreviated Forms (IssueNumbe12038.html) uploaded > > > > Hi all, > > > > Here is the HTML version of Issue #12038 - Proposal: Acronyms and other > > Abbreviated Forms. > > > > Gershon > > > > -- Mr. Gershon Joseph* > > > > The document named Issue #12038 - Proposal: Acronyms and other > Abbreviated > > Forms (IssueNumbe12038.html) has been submitted by Mr. Gershon Joseph* > to > > the OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC document > > repository. > > > > Document Description: > > HTML format of proposal for Issue #12038 - Acronyms and other > Abbreviated > > Forms > > > > View Document Details: > > http://www.oasis- > > open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/document.php?document_id=26361 > > > > Download Document: > > http://www.oasis- > > open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/download.php/26361/IssueNumbe12038.html > > > > > > PLEASE NOTE: If the above links do not work for you, your email > > application > > may be breaking the link into two pieces. You may be able to copy and > > paste > > the entire link address into the address field of your web browser. > > > > -OASIS Open Administration
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]