[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: DITA 1.3 errata 02: How to mark changes in a code example when the only change is the order
This might be considered related to another thing I commented about on DITAweb (just now). There are two "simple deletions" of bits of text in the errata. In one case, the entire paragraph that contained the deletion is revision-marked in the HTML "spec+errata" output. In the other case, there is NO revision mark. As I commented on DITAweb, these need to be handled consistently, one way or the other. If the decision is to revision-mark the entire containing paragraph, that seems somehow to also be consistent with the revision marking that you suggested here for these rearranged bits of content. mag From: Kristen James Eberlein [mailto:kris@eberleinconsulting.com] Hi, Tom. I looked more carefully at the topic in question. The change that we made is not easy to "change mark," as it involved changing the order of sections in a code example. Here's the link to the errata 01 topic: Note in the example that <context> is incorrectly before <prereq>; this is what we fix in errata 02. How should we mark this change? Wrap both the elements in a <ph rev="errata-02>? Best, On 1/11/2018 3:15 PM, Tom Magliery wrote:
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]