[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: TAB-1273: Non-Alphabetical Tables and Lists
I did some lightweight analysis on the tables and lists in the DITA 1.3 Base spec that were: * sorted alphabetically * not sorted alphabetically * "other" -- sorting not relevant Patrick Durusau's feedback that the reading experience of the spec would be enhanced with a higher percentage of sorted tables and lists is correct. The information in the spec with greatest frequency of unsorted tables and lists were: - DITA markup element tables - Terminology lists - Attribute lists Targeting those lists for alphabetization in the next version of the spec would have a positive effect on readability. That is my recommendation. NOTE: Although all the table rows in the 182 Appendix C Content Models are sorted, very few of the comma-separated "contained in" lists are sorted. To some extent, that is a larger readability issue but was outside teh scope of the TAB-1273 feedback. part1-base tables #tables #sorted #unsorted #other -------------------------- ---------- ---------- ----------- ------------ 1.1.x: Intro 0 0 0 0 2.1.x: Arch Intro 17 2 8 7 3.1/3.2: Base / Topic Ref 0 1 0 5 3.10: Attributes 2 0 0 2 Appendix C: Content Models* 182 182 0 0 * Elements "contained" within content model cells are not sorted. part1-base lists #lists #sorted #unsorted #other -------------------------- ---------- ---------- ----------- ------------ 1.1.x: Intro 7 0 0 7 2.1.x: Arch Intro 9 3 6 0 3.1/3.2: Base / Topic Ref 18 2 15 1 3.10: Attributes 22 6 16 0 Appendix C: Content Models 0 0 0 0 Stan
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]