RE: [dita] DITA 2.0 planning: What deprecated elements need to be removed?

Title: RE: [dita] DITA 2.0 planning: What deprecated elements need to be removed?

Sorry I forgot to "regret" myself for today; I'm at the STC Summit.

Someone here (I can't remember who) happened to mention thinking the index @start and @end attrs should go away. I didn't get a reason, but I thought since this thread was conveniently here I'd throw it out for consideration.

mag

-----Original Message-----

From:  on behalf of Robert D Anderson

Sent: Tue 5/17/2016 7:57 AM

To: Eliot Kimber

Cc: Kristen James Eberlein; DITA TC

Subject: Re: [dita] DITA 2.0 planning: What deprecated elements need to be removed?

We marked the <boolean> element deprecated way back in 1.1, so it should be removed:

docs.oasis-open.org/dita/dita/v1.3/os/part1-base/langRef/base/boolean.html

I thought that the <indextermref> element had officially been marked deprecated, but it's not in the spec; regardless, from the description ("undefined"), I think it's a pretty clear choice for removal:

docs.oasis-open.org/dita/dita/v1.3/os/part1-base/langRef/base/indextermref.html

I would also welcome the removal of <topicsetref>, as I've mentioned on recent meetings.

Regards,

Robert D. Anderson

DITA-OT <http://dita-ot.org/>  lead and Co-editor DITA 1.3 specification <http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/dita/v1.3/os/part0-overview/dita-v1.3-os-part0-overview.html> ,

Digital Services Group         

________________________________

       

E-mail:  <mailto:>

Digital Services Group <https://w3.ibm.com/digital/>   

       

11501 BURNET RD,, TX, 78758-3400, AUSTIN, USA  

       

Eliot Kimber ---05/17/2016 09:49:27 AM---A related question is should we move less-used domains to separate specifications? For example, the

From: Eliot Kimber <>

To: Kristen James Eberlein <>, DITA TC <>

Date: 05/17/2016 09:49 AM

Subject: Re: [dita] DITA 2.0 planning: What deprecated elements need to be removed?

Sent by: <>

________________________________

A related question is should we move less-used domains to separate

specifications? For example, the XNAL domain is probably used by somebody

but I've definitely never used it.

It might be useful to try to establish a precedent of having

special-purpose domains and structural types defined in their own

specifications. That would serve to reduce the size of the base DITA

specification while keeping the vocabulary as OASIS standards. It would

also set a precedent for more modularity in the way that DITA-based

standard vocabularies are defined.

Cheers,

E.

----

Eliot Kimber, Owner

Contrext, LLC

http://contrext.com

On 5/17/16, 9:37 AM, "Kristen James Eberlein" <

on behalf of > wrote:

>Also, are there elements like <topicsetref> that do not add value/are

>duplicates and should be removed?

>

>Or little used features or functionality that do not add sufficient

>value and should be considered for removal?

>--

>Best,

>Kris

>

>Kristen James Eberlein

>Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee

>Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting

>www.eberleinconsulting.com

>+1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)

>

>

>---------------------------------------------------------------------

>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

Attachment:
ecblank.gif

Description: ecblank.gif

Attachment:
0D655386.gif

Description: 0D655386.gif

Attachment:
graycol.gif

Description: graycol.gif