RE: [dita] conref source and target [was: Why There are Constraints on Conref]

Title: Re: [dita] conref source and target [was: Why There are Constraints on Conref]

Gotta appreciate the sense of 
humor!

 

But the locus of mischief isn't actually at the conref-bearing element, is 
it?

 

Maybe too verbose as handy 
labels, but we are talking about the conref-bearing element and the 
content-bearing element.

  

  
  From: Joann Hackos 
  [mailto:] 
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 
  2009 11:21 AM
To: Bruce Nevin (bnevin); Michael Priestley; Scott 
  Prentice
Cc: DITA TC; Anderson Robert
Subject: Re: [dita] 
  conref source and target [was: Why There are Constraints on 
  Conref]

  

Well, that would make the plural loci. We could try 
  Loki, the Norse god of mischief, might be more 
  appropriate.
JoAnn

On 9/30/09 11:32 AM, "Bruce Nevin (bnevin)" 
  <> 
  wrote:

  Locus element? 

It specifies the location at 
    which the content will be rendered.

    /Bruce

    
 

      
      From: Michael 
      Priestley  [mailto:] 
      
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009  1:09 PM
To: 
      Scott Prentice
Cc: dita; Robert D 
       Anderson
Subject: Re: [dita] conref source and target 
      [was: Why  There are Constraints on Conref]

 

maybe 
      "referencing element" and  "target element" or "reused element"? 
      

Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
Lead 
      IBM  DITA Architect 

http://dita.xml.org/blog/25 <http://dita.xml.org/blog/25> 
       

   
 From:  Scott Prentice  <>  
 To:  Robert D Anderson  <>  
 Cc:  dita  <>  
 Date:  09/30/2009 12:55 PM  
 Subject:  Re: [dita] conref source and target  [was: 
      Why There are Constraints on Conref]

      
      

I think that the key point of 
      possible confusion  is the term "source." 
The "target" of an 
      href/conref (I assume these  concepts equally apply to 
      
xrefs/links/topicrefs as well?) is clearly the  element that is 
      
referenced by that attribute, but calling the file or  element 
      that's 
doing the referencing the "source" doesn't really make much 
       sense to me. 
This becomes particularly confusing to authors 
      because the  term "source" 
in "single sourcing" typically refers 
      to the content that is  being 
reused, which in this situation 
      would be the "target."

It  does seem that we might want to 
      make an effort to standardize on some  
terminology, and I for one 
      would vote for not using the term "source"  
for either end of 
      this chain. As Jeff suggests, perhaps we should come  
up with 
      terms that can be used which are less ambiguous.

For the 
       href/conref end, perhaps (just throwing out ideas, none seem all 
      
that good  though) ..
- referencing element
- 
      container
- referencer (yuck)
-  caller

And for the 
      other end, perhaps ..
- referenced element
-  target

.. 
      hmm, there must be better 
       terms.

...scott

Robert D Anderson 
      wrote:
> In all  of the material I've added to the spec, I've 
      referred to the
> "target"  as the item pointed to by the 
      conref attribute. Like Eliot, I've
>  thought of conref as an 
      address, which points to a target. However,  I've
> always 
      recognized some confusion with source/target on their own,  so when 
      I
> talk about it, I usually try to call it "the target of the 
       conref
> attribute" to try and be explicit.
>
> 
      Not sure  that helps any, but it means if we go the other way, I know 
      all of
> the  conref material I've put in the spec needs to be 
      reversed.
>
>  Robert D Anderson
> IBM Authoring 
      Tools Development
> Chief  Architect, DITA Open 
      Toolkit
>
> "Ogden, Jeff"  <> wrote on 09/30/2009 08:22:01 
      AM:
>
>    
>> "Ogden, Jeff" <>
>> 09/30/2009 08:22 
       AM
>>
>> To
>>
>>  <>, "dita" 
       <>
>>
>> 
       cc
>>
>> Subject
>>
>> RE: 
      [dita] conref  source and target [was: Why There are Constraints 
      on
>>      
> Conref]
> 
        
>> While I agree that we need to be 
       consistent, the terms "source" and
>> "target" used alone 
      will always  be ambiguous. I think we need to avoid
>> using 
      them and come up with  new terms or phrases to describe the 
      two
>> locations.  My  problem, having said that, is 
      that I'm not feeling
>> particularly  creative and don't 
      have any really good alternatives to
>> 
       suggest.
>>
>> Some "not so good" 
       possibilities:
>>
>>    "conref 
      location" (the  location with the element that has the 
      conref
>>  attribute)
>>    "conref 
      content location" or "content  location" (the location 
      with
>> the content that is being 
       reused)
>>
>> 
         -Jeff
>>
>> 
           
>>> -----Original 
      Message-----
>>>  From: Tony Self [mailto: <mailto:> 
      ]
>>> Sent: 
      Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:26  PM
>>> To: 
      'dita'
>>> Subject: RE: [dita] Why There  are Constraints 
      on Conref
>>>
>>> In the context of 
       single-sourcing, it seems more logical to call the
>>> 
       single
>>> source of many content references the source, 
      and the  places in which
>>> that
>>> single 
      blob of content is  used the target. But I totally get 
      Eliot's
>>>  point
>>> that in the context of 
      linking, the target of the link  is the 
      source!
>>>
>>> Obviously, we need to be 
       consistent one way or the other!
>>>
>>> 
       Tony
>>>
>>> -----Original 
       Message-----
>>> From: ekimber [mailto: <mailto:> 
      ]
>>> Sent: 
      Wednesday, 30 September 2009 12:26  PM
>>> To: Kristen 
      James Eberlein
>>> Cc: Ogden, Jeff;  ; dita
>>> 
      Subject: Re: [dita] Why There are  Constraints on 
      Conref
>>>
>>> On 9/29/09 9:22 PM,  "Kristen 
      James Eberlein" <>
>>> 
       wrote:
>>>
>>> 
             
>>>> I'm glad 
      that Tony brought this up. The DITA spec -- and 
       other
>>>> documentation -- is inconsistent about 
      this.About  50% follows Tony's
>>>> definition of 
      source and target, and  another 50% uses the 
      opposite
>>>> 
       construction.
>>>>
>>>> Personally, it 
      make  sense to me that "source" contains the 
      actual
>>>> content --  the content that gets pulled 
      or pushed into else where
>>>> 
               
>>> 
      (the
>>> 
             
>>>> "target"), 
      but I'd really like to know if  this contradicts 
      some
>>>> 
               
>>> 
      formal
>>> 
             
>>>> definition 
      of source and target ....
>>>> 
               
>>> If 
      you think of conref as a link  (which I do), then source is 
      the
>>> anchor
>>> that  does the addressing 
      and target is the thing  addressed.
>>>
>>> 
      However, I can see the logic in  thinking about conref the other 
      way
>>>  around.
>>>
>>> But the 
      spec should definitely be 
       consistent.
>>>
>>> I discount my opinion on 
      this  matter because I'm too deeply versed in
>>> 
      the
>>>  arcana of linking and addressing. I would 
      support whatever  option
>>> people
>>> think 
      is more intuitive or  easier to talk about 
      clearly.
>>>
>>> 
       Cheers,
>>>
>>> 
       E.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
       ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 
       To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC 
       that
>>> generates this mail.  Follow this link to 
      all your  TCs in OASIS at:
>>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php <https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php> 
      
>>> 
            
>> 
       ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
       To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC 
       that
>> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all 
      your TCs  in OASIS at:
>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php <https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php> 
      
>>
>> 
          
>
>
> 
       ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
       To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC 
      that
>  generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your 
      TCs in OASIS  at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php <https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php> 
      
>
>
> 
         

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To 
       unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC 
      that
generates  this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs 
      in OASIS  at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php <https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php>