I would love to just fix Bookmap but probably doing a bookmap2 is more appropriate for DITA 2.x. Cheers, E. -- Eliot Kimber
http://contrext.com From: <
dita@lists.oasis-open.org> on behalf of Kristen James Eberlein <
kris@eberleinconsulting.com> Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 2:45 PM To: <
dita@lists.oasis-open.org> Subject: Re: [dita] RE: Overall fixes for bookmap for 2.0 The challenge is to figure out what we can do within the general framework of "Breaking backward compatibility is OK, but no major disruption." Will we want to: Revise bookmap design? Deprecate bookmap and replace it with a new design? Something else? That said, I think starting with compiling the current pain points is the place to start. Keep those e-mails coming. Best, Kris Kristen James Eberlein Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
www.eberleinconsulting.com +1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype) On 2/21/2017 2:48 PM, Amber Swope wrote: I agree with all the referencing-related improvements and also second the proposal to change how the bookmap metadata is structured. The deliverable metadata should not be limited only to bookmaps, is too limiting in its current structure, and doesn’t conform to any other standards (see other posts about the options for this). As for the glossary generation, many of my clients struggle with presenting term/definition/alternative form (usually acronyms). The elements are available in the glossary topics, but there is no easy way to structure or specify the generated list type in the deliverable map. Thanks for starting this discussion. Have a great day, Amber From:
dita@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:
dita@lists.oasis-open.org ] On Behalf Of Eliot Kimber Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 9:16 AM To: Scott Hudson; Éric Sirois;
dita@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [dita] RE: Overall fixes for bookmap for 2.0 The issue is only with glossref, which defaults @print to “no”. There are a number of issues with the bookmap design. For example, all the specialized topicref types should be a separate domain so that they can be used in other map types (although our DITA 1.3 ability to use elements from structural domains as though they were domains helps there). There needs to be a wrapper element around the body topicrefs so that there is a consistent frontmatter/body/appendixes/backmatter structure. Need to be able to have chapters before the first part. The book-specific metadata needs to be a separate domain and is woefully underspecified (for example, no provision for 13-digit ISBNs, no provision for ISSNs, no provision for forms of license other than copyright, etc. There are also places where the design doesn’t allow extension where it should although I’d have to remind myself of the details. Need more features to enable glossary generation—current glossarylist is not sufficient. Probably need a separate glossary topicref type (from the same domain that provides glossref) to provide clearer signal that a subtree of the map is in fact a glossary. I’m sure there is more… Cheers, E. -- Eliot Kimber
http://contrext.com From: <
dita@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of Scott Hudson <
scott.hudson@jeppesen.com > Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 11:05 AM To: Eric Sirois <
eric.sirois@ixiasoft.com >, "
dita@lists.oasis-open.org " <
dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: Re: [dita] RE: Overall fixes for bookmap for 2.0 Well, the most annoying thing IMO is that even if the keys resolve, they won’t show up in output unless you specifically set print=“yes”. I’ve run into this a ton with term/abbreviated-form. —Scott From: <
dita@lists.oasis-open.org > on behalf of Éric Sirois <
eric.sirois@ixiasoft.com > Date: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 10:03 AM To: Éric Sirois <
eric.sirois@ixiasoft.com >, "
dita@lists.oasis-open.org " <
dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: [dita] RE: Overall fixes for bookmap for 2.0 Specifically looking to allow Keydefs in a more natural position in the map versus the first instance were topicref is allowed in the current content model. Are there other things that we have ignored about bookmaps in DITA 1.3? Éric Sirois DITA Toolsmith ? IXIASOFT 825 Querbes, Suite 200, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H2V 3X1 tel + 1 514 279-4942 / toll free + 1 877 279-4942 mobile + 1 647 462-3620
eric.sirois@ixiasoft.com /
www.ixiasoft.com From:
dita@lists.oasis-open.org [ mailto:
dita@lists.oasis-open.org ] On Behalf Of Éric Sirois Sent: February 21, 2017 11:33 AM To:
dita@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [dita] Overall fixes for bookmap for 2.0 Hi, We have a number of clients that have hit some limitations for keyref and ditavalref in bookmaps. I would like to work on a proposal that would address those limitations in DITA 2.0. Would it be possible to create a project entry in the DITA 2.0 project? Kind regards, Éric Sirois DITA Toolsmith ? IXIASOFT 825 Querbes, Suite 200, Montréal, Québec, Canada, H2V 3X1 tel + 1 514 279-4942 / toll free + 1 877 279-4942 mobile + 1 647 462-3620
eric.sirois@ixiasoft.com /
www.ixiasoft.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php