OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC

Paul, 
Don,
 
I just checked the 
content model of hazardstatement and it's child elements, and I do not find any 
potential error.
 
Paul, your 
statement "In a hazard statement, you can set the 
width of the hazard statement using the attribute width." is not 
correct.
hazardstatement has 
been derived from the element note and there is no width 
attribute.
 
So we can shorten it 
and just leave everything as it is.
 
 
The width for a 
hazardstatement still is an issue, an important issue, but it is just a rendering 
issue. And we may have to provide guidance or recomendations in a 
document.
 
 
If we like to be 
very fastidious we may have to cover issues 
like: when a hazardstatement with a hazardsymbol is placed into a table and 
the width of the hazardsymbol is exceeding the width of the tablecell, the table 
or even the pagewidth. But then we may need to catch all cases of nested 
width attributes in our specification.
 
Best 
regards
 
Chris
 



 

Thanks for that extra insight, Chris. I'll copy those style/implementation
concerns into the new issues document--I do believe that is the correct
place for us to carry on these more style-oriented discussions.  Thanks for
everyone's understanding in driving to an improved spec statement and
separation of the style issues.

Regards,
--
Don Day
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Architect, Lightweight DITA Publishing Solutions
Email: dond@us.ibm.com
11501 Burnet Rd. MS9033E015, Austin TX 78758
Phone: +1 512-244-2868 (home office)

"Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
 Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"
   --T.S. Eliot


                                                                                                          
  From:       "Christian Kravogel" 

I do apologize for all the unnecessary 
discussion.
 
Someone told me there was a width attribute on 
hazardstatement, and I failed to verify that statement against the actual DITA 
1.2 DTDs.  It turns out the user was looking at a DTD they must have 
modified.
 
Given that there is no width attribute on hazardstatement, 
we don't need to add anything to the spec here, so we can cancel the 
decision we made today to do so.
 
paul



  

  

  From: Christian Kravogel 
  [mailto:christian.kravogel@seicodyne.ch]
Sent: Tuesday, 2009 March 
  24 11:21
To: Grosso, Paul; dond@us.ibm.com; 
  'dita'
Subject: Hazard Statement Width


  

  
Paul, 
  Don,
  
 
  
I just checked the 
  content model of hazardstatement and it's child elements, and I do not find 
  any potential error.
  
 
  
Paul, your statement "In a hazard 
  statement, you can set the width of the hazard statement using the attribute 
  width." is not correct.
  
hazardstatement 
  has been derived from the element note and there is no width 
  attribute.
  
 
  
So we can shorten 
  it and just leave everything as it is.
  
 
  
 
  
The width for a 
  hazardstatement still is an issue, an important issue, but it is just a rendering 
  issue. And we may have to provide guidance or recomendations in a 
  document.
  
 
  
 
  
If we like to be 
  very fastidious we may have to cover issues 
  like: when a hazardstatement with a hazardsymbol is placed into a table 
  and the width of the hazardsymbol is exceeding the width of the tablecell, the 
  table or even the pagewidth. But then we may need to catch all cases of 
  nested width attributes in our 
  specification.
  
 
  
Best 
  regards
  
 
  
Chris