Here's a straw man for
starters:
Referencing
element
The element which identifies its
referenced element in the value of one of the following attributes: href,
conref, keyref, conkeyref ... [complete the list]. See referenced
element.
Referenced
element
The element which is identified
in a referencing element by the value of one of the following attributes: href,
conref, keyref, conkeyref ... [complete the list]. See referencing element.
Whale away at
it!
/B
From: Kristen James Eberlein
[mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02,
2009 9:39 AM
Cc: DITA TC
Subject: [dita] Terminology
issues: Linking and addressing terms? Referencing and referenced
element?
Thanks, Gershon. I've now edited most of
the terms and handled all but five or six of the review topics. (Paul and
Jeff, I'll be sending you e-mail ...)
However, I noticed that the topic
does not contain any of the linking and addressing terminology; I thought we
had agreed to move it there.
Also, it is lacking definitions for
"referencing element" and "referenced element"; can someone provide
them?
Kris
Gershon Joseph (gerjosep) wrote:
Hi
Kris,
I
have updated the topic to address most of this thread. The decision was to
sort the items within each group alphabetically. I have updated some of the
group titles based on the discussions during the TC meetings you missed. The
main thing I have not done is to ensure the new terms are correctly used
throughout the document, and that all old terms are removed or fixed,
whichever is appropriate.
There is likely to still be some quibbling over the group titles, but
I think I've addressed all the issues that were discussed. In some cases
no-one came up with better titles, so I left the previous one or attempted
to improve it.
--
Gershon
From: Kristen James Eberlein [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 10:25 AM
To: DITA
TC
Subject: [dita] Terminology issues: Grouping of
terms
I am reworking the Terminology
topic according to the review comments and the following discussion on the
TC mailing list:
results from recent DITA 1.2 terminology
discussions
From "Ogden, Jeff" <> on 16 Nov 2009 23:40:36
-0000
RE: [dita] results from recent DITA
1.2 terminology discussions
From "Tony Self"
<> on 18 Nov 2009
10:57:57 -0000
Re: [dita] results from recent DITA
1.2 terminology discussions
From Eliot
Kimber <> on 18 Nov 2009
11:10:18 -0000
vocabulary module [was: results
from recent DITA 1.2 terminology discussions]
From "Bruce Nevin (bnevin)" <> on 18 Nov 2009
15:30:56 -0000
Re: vocabulary module [was:
results from recent DITA 1.2 terminologydiscussions]
From Eliot Kimber <> on 18 Nov
2009 15:34:19 -0000
RE: vocabulary module [was:
results from recent DITA 1.2 terminology discussions]
From "Bruce Nevin (bnevin)" <> on 18 Nov 2009
16:35:54 -0000
Re: vocabulary module [was:
results from recent DITA 1.2 terminologydiscussions]
From Eliot Kimber <> on 18 Nov
2009 16:38:50 -0000
RE: [dita] Re: vocabulary module
[was: results from recent DITA 1.2 terminology
discussions]
From "Bruce Nevin (bnevin)"
<> on 18 Nov 2009
17:13:17 -0000
Can anyone clarify for me what decision was made about how to
group the terms? On the first terminology call which I chaired, we decided
that Gershon would attempt to devise an ordering scheme, but that we would
default to simply listing the terms in alphabetical order if the group did
not come to a consensus on how to group the terms.
Was a grouping
order agreed upon? Or should I simply alphabetize the
terms?
Kris
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
