OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC

 View Only

Re: [dita] Element Type Names Don't Matter--Class Is Everything

  • 1.  Re: [dita] Element Type Names Don't Matter--Class Is Everything

    Posted 08-04-2004 15:49
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    dita message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


    Subject: Re: [dita] Element Type Names Don't Matter--Class Is Everything


    Eliot Kimber wrote:
    
    > And as I think of it now, this also suggests that the normative 
    > definition of the DITA document types should be a "data dictionary" of 
    > element classes, not a collection of element types or a DTD. That is, 
    > any DTD or schema that reflects the DITA *classes* is only one of an 
    > infinite number of possible such DTDs or schemas and therefore any DTD 
    > or schema published as a standard would not be *the* definition of the 
    > DITA types of merely a conforming implementation of the DITA types. We 
    > should certainly publish at least one DTD and one Schema as reference 
    > implementation but I don't think they can be *the* normative definition 
    > of what the DITA types are.
    
    To repeat what I said to Don in a private conversation:
    
    If we chose we could publish a normative, abstract, "meta" DTD or schema 
    that defines the rules for classes *as though* they were concrete 
    element types. But this schema would not be directly used by document 
    instances.
    
    You would still need concrete schemas that implement the mapping and 
    reflect the constraints defined in the meta-schema.
    
    Document instances could then be validated against the meta-schema by 
    (conceptually) generating an "architectural instance" that reflects the 
    class mappings and then validating that instance against the DITA meta-DTD.
    
    For validating schemas and DTDs against the meta-DTD I'm not so sure 
    although I'm sure it's possible.
    
    It would probably also be possible to automatically generate both a 
    concrete DITA base DTD and concrete schema that reflected the 
    meta-DTD--since at the DITA base level the element type names are the 
    same as the leaf classes, it's a trivial transform. But those generated 
    concrete schemas would be for the convenience of users and implementors, 
    not normative definitions of what the DITA types were.
    
    Cheers,
    
    E.
    -- 
    W. Eliot Kimber
    Professional Services
    Innodata Isogen
    9390 Research Blvd, #410
    Austin, TX 78759
    (512) 372-8122
    
    eliot@innodata-isogen.com
    www.innodata-isogen.com
    


    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]