If I'm reading this correctly, it sounds like we are
augmenting DTD constraints with some home brew syntax and semantics that users
will need to learn and understand and implementors will need to
implement.
It sounds to me like some of these more complex proposals
are just piling completely new concepts on top of an already complex
application. Am I the only one somewhat concerned
with the complexity we are adding to DITA?
paul
From: Erik Hennum [mailto:]
Sent: Monday, 2007 August 20 23:20
To:
Subject: Re: [dita] Groups - Proposal
12008 - vocabulary and integration constraints (HTML)
(IssueConstraints12008.html) uploaded
Hi, Thoughtful TC:
Some comments from Deborah on the latest draft
provoked some additional revisions:
The HTML output for web browser
convenience:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/download.php/25027/IssueConstraints12008.html
The
DITA version:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/download.php/25028/IssueConstraints12008.dita
My
apologies if that revision forces anyone to reread this
draft.
Looking forward to the conversation,
Erik
Hennum
Erik Hennum/Oakland/IBM@IBMUS
wrote on 08/20/2007 04:40:16 PM:
> I've uploaded the HTML version
for convenience.
>
> ...
>
> The document
named Proposal 12008 - vocabulary and integration constraints
> (HTML)
(IssueConstraints12008.html) has been submitted by Erik Hennum to
> the
OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC document
>
repository.
