On 6/30/09 10:08 AM, "Ogden, Jeff" <> wrote:
> Is this a good idea? It seem like a big change from the type values
> that were called for in DITA 1.0 and 1.1 (topic, concept, fig, fn, ...).
> Is this in support of a DITA 1.2 proposal? Was it something that the
> DITA TC talked about and agreed to? Please point me at an e-mail
> discussion or other document if I missed something.
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200905/msg00033.html
This is essentially a bug fix: DITA has always been broken in this regard in
that xrefs to specialized types where the name is not qualified are
potentially ambiguous as there's no requirement that a given non-topic
element name be globally unique across all possible vocabulary modules.
For example, if you xref to another topic and say type "foo", it's ambiguous
whether you mean "my-domain-d/foo" or "your-domain-d/foo".
Cheers,
E.
----
Eliot Kimber | Senior Solutions Architect | Really Strategies, Inc.
email: <mailto:>
office: 610.631.6770 | cell: 512.554.9368
2570 Boulevard of the Generals | Suite 213 | Audubon, PA 19403
www.reallysi.com <http://www.reallysi.com> | http://blog.reallysi.com
<http://blog.reallysi.com> | www.rsuitecms.com <http://www.rsuitecms.com>
