Re: [dita] RE: Overall fixes for bookmap for 2.0

From
Kristen James Eberlein <>
Date
2017-02-21T20:46:38+00:00
ID
Thread
Re: [dita] RE: Overall fixes for bookmap for 2.0
The challenge is to figure out what we can do within the general
      framework of "Breaking backward compatibility is OK, but no major
      disruption."

    
Will we want to:

    
      
Revise bookmap design?

      
Deprecate bookmap and replace it with a new design?

      
Something else?

    
    
That said, I think starting with compiling the current pain
      points is the place to start. Keep those e-mails coming.

    

    
Best,

      Kris

      

      Kristen James Eberlein

      Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee

      Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting

      www.eberleinconsulting.com

      +1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)

      

    

    
On 2/21/2017 2:48 PM, Amber Swope
      wrote:

    

    
      
      
      
      

        
I agree with
            all the referencing-related improvements and also second the
            proposal to change how the bookmap metadata is structured.
            The deliverable metadata should not be limited only to
            bookmaps, is too limiting in its current structure, and
            doesn’t conform to any other standards (see other posts
            about the options for this).

        
 

        
As for the
            glossary generation, many of my clients struggle with
            presenting term/definition/alternative form (usually
            acronyms). The elements are available in the glossary
            topics, but there is no easy way to  structure or specify
            the generated list type in the deliverable map. 

        
 

        
Thanks for
            starting this discussion.

        
 

        
Have a great
            day,

        
Amber

        
 

        

        
 

        
 

        
 

        

          

            
From:
                
                [mailto:]
                On Behalf Of Eliot Kimber

                Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 9:16 AM

                To: Scott Hudson; Éric Sirois; 

                Subject: Re: [dita] RE: Overall fixes for bookmap
                for 2.0

          

        

        
 

        
The issue is only with glossref, which
          defaults @print to “no”.

        
 

        
There are a number of issues with the
          bookmap design.

        
 

        
For example, all the specialized topicref
          types should be a separate domain so that they can be used in
          other map types (although our DITA 1.3 ability to use elements
          from structural domains as though they were domains helps
          there). 

        
 

        
There needs to be a wrapper element around
          the body topicrefs so that there is a consistent
          frontmatter/body/appendixes/backmatter structure.

        
 

        
Need to be able to have chapters before the
          first part.

        
 

        
The book-specific metadata needs to be a
          separate domain and is woefully underspecified (for example,
          no provision for 13-digit ISBNs, no provision for ISSNs, no
          provision for forms of license other than copyright, etc.

        
 

        
There are also places where the design
          doesn’t allow extension where it should although I’d have to
          remind myself of the details.

        
 

        
Need more features to enable glossary
          generation—current glossarylist is not sufficient. Probably
          need a separate glossary topicref type (from the same domain
          that provides glossref) to provide  clearer signal that a
          subtree of the map is in fact a glossary.

        
 

        
I’m sure there is more…

        
 

        
Cheers,

        
 

        
E.

        

          

            

              
--

            

            

              
Eliot Kimber

            

            

              
http://contrext.com

            

            

              
 

            

          

        

        
 

        
 

        

          
From: <>
              on behalf of Scott Hudson <>

              Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 11:05 AM

              To: Eric Sirois <>,
              ""
              <>

              Subject: Re: [dita] RE: Overall fixes for bookmap
              for 2.0

        

        

          
 

        

        

          
Well, the most annoying thing IMO is that
            even if the keys resolve, they won’t show up in output
            unless you specifically set print=“yes”. I’ve run into this
            a ton with term/abbreviated-form.

        

        

          
 

        

        

          
—Scott

        

        

          
 

        

        

          
From: <>
              on behalf of Éric Sirois <>

              Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 10:03 AM

              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 
              

            
 

            

            
 

          

        

        
---------------------------------------------------------------------
            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