dita — archive

[Paul Grosso <pgrosso@ptc.com>]

But that wouldn't address my concern.  This isn't a 
normative versus informative issue.
 
I'm saying that the DITA spec itself isn't the place to 
define this, so using shoulds and mays isn't any better than 
musts.
 
My point exactly is that implementations aren't going to do 
anything about sorting, and users shouldn't expect anything about sorting, since 
we aren't talking about sorting in the DITA spec, at least not in DITA 
1.2.
 
We're just adding an element to be a place to provide 
information that could be used by some non-DITA-standardized process.  
Whatever that process is--unless the TC agrees to get into defining sorting in 
DITA 1.2 (and even then, we'd probably never define all the uses one might 
reasonably want to make of collate-as)--has to be defined somewhere else. 

 
paul
 



  

  

  From: Deborah_Pickett@moldflow.com 
  [mailto:Deborah_Pickett@moldflow.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 2007 August 28 
  17:55
To: Grosso, Paul
Cc: 
  dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [dita] Groups - Proposal 
  #12035: Generic collation element


  

Hi Paul,

I see where you're coming from, and I think I agree 
  with you, but...

If a standard is 
  to be of use to implementors, there needs to be some explanation about 
  expected processing, otherwise it can happen that there isn't enough context 
  for implementors to understand what the feature is for.

Other standards manage this by using RFC 2119's MAY, 
  SHOULD, MUST, etc., stating that "This section is normative" or "This section 
  is informative".  It doesn't seem that DITA 1.1 does this (yet).

I'm happy to tag the normative vs. 
  informative bits for #12035 if people think that it's worthwhile.

--
Deborah Pickett
Information 
  Architect, Moldflow Corporation, 
  Melbourne
Deborah_Pickett@moldflow.com



  
"Grosso, Paul" 
        <pgrosso@ptc.com> 
        
08/29/2007 03:12 AM 
      

        

          

          

            

              
To
            
<dita@lists.oasis-open.org> 
          

            

              
cc
            

          

            

              
Subject
            
RE: [dita] Groups - Proposal 
              #12035: Generic collation element

    



 
>