Wouldn't moving XNAL into its own domain be backwards incompatible when
we do it in DITA 1.2?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert D Anderson [mailto:]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 12:11 PM
> To:
> Subject: [dita] Bookmap/XNAL repercussions
>
>
> As I make the bookmap changes from today's meeting, I'm also
> merging it with the other 1.1 prototype files that are
> available. While doing that, the decision to make XNAL into a
> domain has demonstrated some side effects.
>
> The XNAL domain adds one element, authorinformation, as a
> specialization of <data>. The <data> design has it appearing
> in many more locations than I had first understood, including
> inside most other meta elements. This means that, among
> others, the authorinformation element now shows up inside
> elements like <source>, <category>, and <platform>.
>
> I've mentioned before that the XNAL domain will not be useful
> in topic specializations until domain specialization is
> enhanced, allowing you to limit where your new element shows
> up. That enhancement has been talked about for DITA 1.2. I
> thought that bookmap's constrained model worked around this
> problem, but it is becoming clear that I was wrong. So,
> primarily for usability reasons, I would propose the
> following changes to
> bookmap:
>
> 1. Do not include authorinformation as a domain. Instead,
> include it directly in the bookmap as a child of bookmeta.
> 2. Continue to define all of the XNAL elements in a separate
> module. In DITA 1.2 or DITA 2.0, plan to move XNAL to a
> domain. This will be easy because it is already maintained in
> its own module.
>
> Are there any concerns with this proposal?
>
> Robert D Anderson
> IBM Authoring Tools Development
> Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit
> (507) 253-8787, T/L 553-8787
>
>
