[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] DITA Proposed Feature: Extensibility of DITA through new attributes
> Within an enterprise you may want to disallow further > specialization of a set of types. That is, one key benefit of > specialization is that it can be *controlled*. Thus it > follows that you should have the option of disallowing it, > as well as allowing it. Would you buy the argument that a type should be able to control the addition of other attributes if and only if the type can control other aspects of specialization? E.g. if a type can declare that it is or is not specializable or allows for content model tightening? Do you agree that controlling attribute specialization is just a small part of it? If so, then I would defer it until the whole issue of specialization control is covered holistically. > This is recognition of the fundamental problem of recognition posed by > the use of the no-namespace namespace--namely, you have no reliable, > general way to tell what application the attributes correspond to. Thus > it seems like it might be useful to disallow the confusion by requiring > non-DITA-defined attributes to be qualified. We could make that rule globally. Or we could give specializers control over it as part of the specialization control issue. I would say that attributes belong to the same namespace/domain as the elements they are on unless they use a namespace prefix explicitly. Paul Prescod
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]