OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] XML-appropriate editing data structures

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

You are right.  

In a DoD contractor environment, those are usually 
called out the logistics analyst who communicates 
and documents the requirements in the LSAR records. 
How the author uses those records is detemined by 
the capabilities of the system.  It can be the 
case that the LSAR record is converted into the 
appropriate markup. 

To be clear, in an IETM, the 
Warning, Caution or Note is typically implemented 
as a modal dialog.  In a paper manual, it is a 
paragraph/whatever with a very specific format 
applied.  Paired technicians may work to satisfy 
the acknowledgement requirement.

Because these requirements are detailed 
and explicit by contract deliverable, the ability 
to test and verify that they are in accordance 
with the contract requirement (say CDRL, for 
example) that calls out the specific construct 
(may quote the DTD or schema verbatim), is helped 
by the correct-by-construction technique made 
possible when using context-sensitive editing. 
In some systems, that is achieved by compiling 
the DTD/Schema into the editing GUI, and others, 
by requiring validation checks at some given 


From: Elliotte Rusty Harold [mailto:elharo@metalab.unc.edu]

At 10:11 AM -0500 4/12/04, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>A DTD can be written to do exactly that by requiring an
>acknowledgement of the warning.   This is IETM markup
>and that can be done.

I suppose I can see how it could require an acknowledgement of the 
warning. However, I still maintain that it is incapable of 

1. That a warning is called for.
2. That a warning has been mislabelled as a caution by the writer.


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS