I’m personally quite fond of (most of) the D4P pubmap approach as an alternative to bookmap – parts/chapters/appendices/etc. are defined in domains, then leveraged by several shells, allowing things like chapter maps and part maps and such.
Allows for considerably more flexibility than bookmap.
Chris
From: <> on behalf of Éric Sirois <>
Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 12:03 PM
To: Éric Sirois <>, "" <>
Subject: [dita] RE: Overall fixes for bookmap for 2.0
Specifically looking to allow Keydefs in a more natural position in the map versus the first instance were topicref is allowed in the current content model. Are there other things that we have ignored about bookmaps in DITA 1.3?
Éric Sirois
DITA Toolsmith
IXIASOFT
825 Querbes, Suite 200, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H2V 3X1
tel + 1 514 279-4942 / toll free + 1 877 279-4942
mobile + 1 647 462-3620
/
www.ixiasoft.com
From: [mailto:]
On Behalf Of Éric Sirois
Sent: February 21, 2017 11:33 AM
To:
Subject: [dita] Overall fixes for bookmap for 2.0
Hi,
We have a number of clients that have hit some limitations for keyref and ditavalref in bookmaps. I would like to work on a proposal that would address those limitations in DITA 2.0. Would it be possible to create a project entry in the
DITA 2.0 project?
Kind regards,
Éric Sirois
DITA Toolsmith
IXIASOFT
825 Querbes, Suite 200, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H2V 3X1
tel + 1 514 279-4942 / toll free + 1 877 279-4942
mobile + 1 647 462-3620
/
www.ixiasoft.com
