dita message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: 1.2 Proposal: Re-create "general task" from "topic"
- From: "Park Seth-R01164" <seth.park@freescale.com>
- To: "DITA TC" <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:49:54 -0700
The need for
specialized expertise to sort out local shell conflicts created from different
domain (constraint or otherwise) usage is unavoidable. However, the
advent of general task is pushing this conflict into the hands of the most basic
users who expect--rightly or not--that DITA can be used as an out-of-the box
solution without shell configuration expertise.
So, I propose we
walk away from the current implementation of general task as a constraint of
task. Instead, create a new general task specialization from base
topic?
This would mean a
new top-level element name (<general-task>), a new body name
(<general-taskbody>), a new MOD file (general-task.mod), a new DTD shell
(general-task.dtd), etc.
This would
resolve:
- "Which task model
to include in dita base" -- Include *both* of them.
- "Can we conref" --
Because they are clearly different DTDs, the assumption will not be "yes, of
course... they're the same thing."
- "Should we rename
task.mod" -- Clearly no.
I think it's
philosophically a great idea to create task as a constraint of general task, but
it's simply causing more trouble for our basic users than it might be
worth.
I know it's late in
the game, but the creation of this structural specialization would be simple to
do; it would affect only the terminology in a few papers by the Adoption TC
and the few articles that describe the "making of" general task. Ultimately, I
think it would require less effort for us, tool vendors, and the general
user population.
-seth
park
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]