OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC

Expand all | Collapse all

Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref

  • 1.  Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref

    Posted 01-21-2009 20:10
    From the Jan 20, 2009 minutes:
    
    8. New ITEM: "Conref push for static output formats" discussion
    * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200812/msg00006.html
    * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200812/msg00007.html
    Discussion from Su-Laine Yeo and Michael Priestley ensued. Michael
    clarified that there would be a master build map (owned by the
    information architect for the product) that the processor would call.
    How to handle content that should not be displayed anywhere? Su-Laine
    stated that this is a problem for anchorref  also. Possibly need a new
    attribute. Discussion to follow via e-mail.
    
    ------------------
    
    Here is a summary of the overall user goal we discussed in the meeting:
    
    
    Using this example:
    - Folder1 containing a file called defaultmap.ditamap and a file called
    default.dita. The map contains a topicref to default.dita. 
    - Folder2 containing a file called pushmap.ditamap and a file called
    push.dita, where the push.dita topic has a 


  • 2.  Re: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref pushand anchorref

    Posted 01-21-2009 20:23
    On 1/21/09 2:09 PM, "Su-Laine Yeo" 


  • 3.  RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref

    Posted 01-21-2009 21:28
    I agree that using 


  • 4.  RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref

    Posted 01-24-2009 00:55
    > How do we use conref= for the following use case and example from the
    > proposal? What element gets the conref=?
    
    I believe you could do it this way:
    
    Map for cars in general, with filename of "car.ditamap" :
    
    ...
      
        
    ...
     and 


  • 5.  RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref

    Posted 02-03-2009 19:42
    Hi everyone,
    
    In this morning's TC call we discussed the requirement to be able to say
    "these topics need to be processed but do not contribute directly to any
    output result". I said I would follow up by writing a proposal for
    fulfilling this requirement, that the group could discuss and then vote
    on. This is a proposed substantive change to the 1.2 specification:
    
    Overview:
    The discussion this morning centered on fulfilling this requirement by
    adding a new attribute to the topicref attribute set. The new attribute
    could be called "localdisplay" and would function in an analogous way to
    the toc, print, and search attributes. There are other possible ways to
    fulfill the requirement, such as the one suggested by Eliot in a branch
    of this thread, however the idea of a new "localdisplay" attribute seems
    like a clean and reasonable approach, so I will expand on it here.
    
    Proposed scope: 
    The new attribute should be added to the %topicref-atts; and
    %topicref-atts-no-toc; attribute sets described here:
    http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.1/CD02/langspec/common/topicref-atts.
    html
    
    Proposed name:
    "localdisplay". In previous discussions I've suggested  a name of
    "appear" or "display" but "localdisplay" is now my favourite (I think
    Gershon suggested it).
    
    Proposed description:
    Specifies whether the topic should be displayed in output at the
    location of the topic reference. For example, if a topic is not intended
    to be used directly in output, but must be included in a map because it
    contains content that is to be transcluded into another topic via the
    conref push mechanism, set the localdisplay attribute to "no" to prevent
    the topic from appearing twice in output. If the value is not specified
    locally, but it specified on an ancestor, it will inherit the value of
    the ancestor.
    
    yes
        Include the topic at the location of the topicref 
    
    no 
       Do not include the topic at the location of the topicref
    
    -dita-use-conref-target
        See Using the -dita-use-conref-target value for more information.
    
    Usage example:
    Continuing on my example from below, the author of Folder2 can create a
    third map called masterbuild.ditamap, with contents as follows:
    
    
    	
    
    The author of Folder2 and of masterbuild.ditamap can then process
    masterbuild.ditamap to create deliverables. Any topics referenced by
    pushmap.ditamap will not appear at the end of a deliverable, however the
    contents of the pushed topics will appear in appropriate locations
    within the topics that are referenced by defaultmap.ditamap.
    
    Regards,
    Su-Laine
    
    Su-Laine Yeo
    Interaction Design Specialist 
    
    JustSystems Canada, Inc.
    Office: 778-327-6356 
    syeo@justsystems.com
    http://na.justsystems.com 
    
    
    
    
    


  • 6.  Re: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref pushand anchorref

    Posted 02-04-2009 14:53
    On 2/3/09 1:41 PM, "Su-Laine Yeo" 


  • 7.  RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref

    Posted 02-04-2009 15:20
    Sorry I just noticed this, but I was quite surprised
    to see we're talking about a major change/addition to
    DITA 1.2.  I thought we had closed 1.2 to new things
    quite some time ago.
    
    How did the discussion go that had us deciding we could
    change our minds at this late date and add something new
    to DITA 1.2?
    
    If this is "just" part of the conref push proposal, then
    why did we just think of it?  The conref push proposal
    was supposed to be completed months ago.  Perhaps this is 
    evidence that conref push is not ready for DITA 1.2.
    
    paul 
    
    > 


  • 8.  RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push andanchorref

    Posted 02-04-2009 15:32

    Hi Paul,

    I agree this is an important change, and it's unfortunate it wasn't caught before. As the original proposer of the feature, I thought the TOC attribute would be sufficient. But I think Su-Laine makes a good case for creating a new attribute.

    Having discovered a shortcoming in the feature, we do indeed have two choices:
    - fix it
    - remove it

    We haven't had the discussion about removing it, but you're right that we should have that discussion. However, I don't think removing the entire feature (as planned and as already partially implemented by some) is necesarily less disruptive than adding one new attribute with clear semantics and general usefulness.
     
    Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
    Lead IBM DITA Architect
    mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
    http://dita.xml.org/blog/25



    "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>

    02/04/2009 10:19 AM

    To
    <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
    cc
    Subject
    RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref





    Sorry I just noticed this, but I was quite surprised
    to see we're talking about a major change/addition to
    DITA 1.2.  I thought we had closed 1.2 to new things
    quite some time ago.

    How did the discussion go that had us deciding we could
    change our minds at this late date and add something new
    to DITA 1.2?

    If this is "just" part of the conref push proposal, then
    why did we just think of it?  The conref push proposal
    was supposed to be completed months ago.  Perhaps this is
    evidence that conref push is not ready for DITA 1.2.

    paul

    >



  • 9.  RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref

    Posted 02-04-2009 19:18
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    I don’t yet have a firm opinion on whether we should try to fix the conref push feature by adding a new attribute or whether we should drop the conref push feature entirely. However, I’d like to point out that conref push is just one of the features that depends on the new attribute. If I understand the specs correctly, the new attribute is also needed in order to use the keyref feature and the anchor/anchorref feature in all the ways they are intended to be used.

    Su-Laine

    Su-Laine Yeo
    Interaction Design Specialist

    JustSystems Canada, Inc.
    Office: 778-327-6356
    syeo@justsystems.com

    http://na.justsystems.com

    From: Michael Priestley [mailto:mpriestl@ca.ibm.com]
    Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 7:32 AM
    To: Grosso, Paul
    Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
    Subject: RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref


    Hi Paul,

    I agree this is an important change, and it's unfortunate it wasn't caught before. As the original proposer of the feature, I thought the TOC attribute would be sufficient. But I think Su-Laine makes a good case for creating a new attribute.

    Having discovered a shortcoming in the feature, we do indeed have two choices:
    - fix it
    - remove it

    We haven't had the discussion about removing it, but you're right that we should have that discussion. However, I don't think removing the entire feature (as planned and as already partially implemented by some) is necesarily less disruptive than adding one new attribute with clear semantics and general usefulness.
     
    Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
    Lead IBM DITA Architect
    mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
    http://dita.xml.org/blog/25


    "Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>

    02/04/2009 10:19 AM

    To

    <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>

    cc

    Subject

    RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref




    Sorry I just noticed this, but I was quite surprised
    to see we're talking about a major change/addition to
    DITA 1.2.  I thought we had closed 1.2 to new things
    quite some time ago.

    How did the discussion go that had us deciding we could
    change our minds at this late date and add something new
    to DITA 1.2?

    If this is "just" part of the conref push proposal, then
    why did we just think of it?  The conref push proposal
    was supposed to be completed months ago.  Perhaps this is
    evidence that conref push is not ready for DITA 1.2.

    paul

    >


    > From: Su-Laine Yeo [mailto:su-laine.yeo@justsystems.com]
    > Sent: Tuesday, 2009 February 03 13:42
    > To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
    > Subject: RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute
    > for conref push and anchorref
    >
    > Hi everyone,
    >
    > In this morning's TC call we discussed the requirement to be
    > able to say
    > "these topics need to be processed but do not contribute
    > directly to any
    > output result". I said I would follow up by writing a proposal for
    > fulfilling this requirement, that the group could discuss and
    > then vote
    > on. This is a proposed substantive change to the 1.2 specification:
    >
    > Overview:
    > The discussion this morning centered on fulfilling this requirement by
    > adding a new attribute to the topicref attribute set. The new
    > attribute
    > could be called "localdisplay" and would function in an
    > analogous way to
    > the toc, print, and search attributes. There are other
    > possible ways to
    > fulfill the requirement, such as the one suggested by Eliot
    > in a branch
    > of this thread, however the idea of a new "localdisplay"
    > attribute seems
    > like a clean and reasonable approach, so I will expand on it here.
    >
    > Proposed scope:
    > The new attribute should be added to the %topicref-atts; and
    > %topicref-atts-no-toc; attribute sets described here:
    > http://docs.oasis-open.org/dita/v1.1/CD02/langspec/common/topi
    > cref-atts.
    > html
    >
    > Proposed name:
    > "localdisplay". In previous discussions I've suggested  a name of
    > "appear" or "display" but "localdisplay" is now my favourite (I think
    > Gershon suggested it).
    >
    > Proposed description:
    > Specifies whether the topic should be displayed in output at the
    > location of the topic reference. For example, if a topic is
    > not intended
    > to be used directly in output, but must be included in a map
    > because it
    > contains content that is to be transcluded into another topic via the
    > conref push mechanism, set the localdisplay attribute to "no"
    > to prevent
    > the topic from appearing twice in output. If the value is not
    > specified
    > locally, but it specified on an ancestor, it will inherit the value of
    > the ancestor.
    >
    > yes
    >     Include the topic at the location of the topicref
    >
    > no
    >    Do not include the topic at the location of the topicref
    >
    > -dita-use-conref-target
    >     See Using the -dita-use-conref-target value for more information.
    >
    > Usage example:
    > Continuing on my example from below, the author of Folder2
    > can create a
    > third map called masterbuild.ditamap, with contents as follows:
    >
    > <map>
    >                  <topicref href = "Folder1/default.ditamap" format = "ditamap"/>
    >                  <topicref href = "Folder2/pushmap.ditamap" format ="ditamap"
    > localdisplay ="no"/>
    > </map>
    >
    > The author of Folder2 and of masterbuild.ditamap can then process
    > masterbuild.ditamap to create deliverables. Any topics referenced by
    > pushmap.ditamap will not appear at the end of a deliverable,
    > however the
    > contents of the pushed topics will appear in appropriate locations
    > within the topics that are referenced by defaultmap.ditamap.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Su-Laine
    >
    > Su-Laine Yeo
    > Interaction Design Specialist
    >
    > JustSystems Canada, Inc.
    > Office: 778-327-6356
    > syeo@justsystems.com
    > http://na.justsystems.com
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    Original Message-----

    > From: Su-Laine Yeo [mailto:su-laine.yeo@justsystems.com]
    > Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 12:10 PM
    > To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
    > Subject: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for
    > conref push
    > and anchorref
    >
    > From the Jan 20, 2009 minutes:
    >
    > 8. New ITEM: "Conref push for static output formats" discussion
    > * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200812/msg00006.html
    > * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200812/msg00007.html
    > Discussion from Su-Laine Yeo and Michael Priestley ensued. Michael
    > clarified that there would be a master build map (owned by the
    > information architect for the product) that the processor would call.
    > How to handle content that should not be displayed anywhere? Su-Laine
    > stated that this is a problem for anchorref  also. Possibly need a new
    > attribute. Discussion to follow via e-mail.
    >
    > ------------------
    >
    > Here is a summary of the overall user goal we discussed in
    > the meeting:
    >
    >
    > Using this example:
    > - Folder1 containing a file called defaultmap.ditamap and a
    > file called
    > default.dita. The map contains a topicref to default.dita.
    > - Folder2 containing a file called pushmap.ditamap and a file called
    > push.dita, where the push.dita topic has a <step> to be pushed into a
    > set of steps in default.dita. The map contains a topicref to
    > push.dita.
    >
    > We want the author of the Folder1 contents to not have to
    > know anything
    > about the contents of Folder2. The author of Folder2 must be able to
    > produce a deliverable that resolves conrefs pushed from push.dita into
    > default.dita. One way for the author of Folder2 to do this is
    > to create
    > a third map called masterbuild.ditamap, with contents as follows:
    >
    > <map>
    >                  <topicref href = "Folder1/default.ditamap" format = "ditamap/>
    >                  <topicref href = "Folder2/pushmap.ditamap" format ="ditamap"/>
    > </map>
    >
    > The author of Folder2 and of masterbuild.ditamap can then process
    > masterbuild.ditamap to create deliverables.
    >
    > A problem with using master build maps is that, given current
    > processing
    > rules, processing masterbuild.ditamap, the contents of pushmap.ditamap
    > would appear in output. Using the toc attribute will not solve the
    > problem as the toc attribute suppresses topics from the table of
    > contents but not the body of the deliverable. In PDF output
    > the contents
    > of pushmap.ditamap would appear to be dumped at the end of
    > the document.
    > Also, the toc attribute does not necessarily prevent the topics of
    > pushmap.ditamap from appearing twice in search results or indexes, as
    > the behaviour of the toc attribute with respect to search and
    > indexes is
    > undefined. Therefore, a new @appear attribute which would completely
    > suppress pushmap.ditamap from the toc, the body of the document, and
    > other access points such as search and index, would be
    > useful. There are
    > other ways to solve this problem, but a new attribute is one obvious
    > solution.
    >
    > I briefly mentioned in the meeting that we have a similar problem with
    > anchorref. To explain further, the <anchorref> element proposed here:
    > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/26092/IssueM
    > apConvenie
    > nces12047.html is similar to conref push in that it is also
    > intended to
    > allow pushing of content from one independent content set
    > into another.
    > A master build map would also be needed with topicrefs to both the
    > default map containing the <anchor> and the pushing map containing the
    > <anchorref>.
    >
    > The <anchorref> proposal currently says, " The copied child
    > elements can
    > be suppressed in the current context by setting the toc
    > attribute on the
    > child elements to "yes" and on the <anchorref> element to "no"." As I
    > explain above, setting a toc attribute would not suppress
    > anything from
    > the current context, so I think the @appear attribute is what
    > we'd need
    > on this as well.
    >
    > As an aside, I am not sure why we need to add a new
    > <anchorref> element
    > when it seems to do the same thing as conref push.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Su-Laine
    >
    > Su-Laine Yeo
    > Interaction Design Specialist
    >
    > JustSystems Canada, Inc.
    > Office: 778-327-6356
    > syeo@justsystems.com
    > http://na.justsystems.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_workgr
    > oups.php
    >
    >
    > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    > 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_workgr
    > oups.php
    >
    >

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    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



  • 10.  RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push andanchorref

    Posted 02-04-2009 19:32
    Hi Su-Laine,
    
    > ... If I understand the specs correctly, the new
    > attribute is also needed in order to use the keyref feature and the
    > anchor/anchorref feature in all the ways they are intended to be used.
    
    I do not think it is *needed* for those - but it could be very useful for
    them. In each case you've defined a reference to a topic which you may not
    want rendered locally.
    
    For many of the keyref use cases - most of the ones I've dealt with so far
    - you're defining keys for topics that are a primary part of your content.
    You're just providing a simple key that can be used to reference it. For
    those, you would not want to turn off local display. However, if you are
    providing a key that lets you reference other content, it could certainly
    be useful. Much of that can already be inferred from the scope attribute,
    but that does have limitations.
    
    For anchorref - in some cases, you will want the content to appear both
    where defined and where pushed (from my understanding of the proposal, that
    is considered the primary use case - so the spec describes how to get other
    behaviors if needed). I feel that the local display setting could be
    helpful for other use cases - but I'd need to think it through a bit more
    to be sure.
    
    Robert D Anderson
    IBM Authoring Tools Development
    Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit
    
    


  • 11.  RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push andanchorref

    Posted 02-13-2009 21:21
    Hi,
    
    I just wanted to raise this issue again before our next meeting. I don't
    have a solid solution, just a summary of where I think we are:
    * It seems we agree there should be a new attribute.
    * The purpose is to distinguish topics that are used as a resource, for
    whatever reason, but are not meant to be read on their own as part of the
    current information.
    * In many (most?) cases, the practical effect will be that the topic does
    not get rendered (generated, output, whatever), even though it is present
    for conref resolution or other uses
    
    Right so far? If so, that just leaves the attribute name and value. I think
    this is where the conflict lies.
    
    My thoughts on this:
    * As I said on the call, I prefer to avoid an attribute named "output",
    because of the implication that DITA has to generate some other format.
    * That said - I realize that the average user is going to think of this
    attribute in terms of its processing implications
    * If we go with an attribute related to the usage role, then we have to
    find a way to distinguish it from other roles we have today. We have a role
    attribute that describes how the target of a link relates to the current
    topic (parent/child/etc), which is not the same as this role. We also often
    talk about reader roles (administrator, etc). In this case we mean the role
    of a topic within a set of topics, completely unrelated to the reader.
    * I prefer to avoid yes/no attribute values. We had print=yes/no, which
    seemed obvious, until we had to add "printonly". We have toc=yes/no, but
    there is discussion of new values to handle map references. Yes/no makes it
    much more difficult to expand when we discover new cases.
    
    To me - we are describing "This topic is not a readable topic to be viewed
    or displayed" vs "This topic is a normal topic that makes sense on its
    own". To most users, it will probably be "This topic should not generate
    output" vs "This topic is a normal topic". So, a few unlikely suggestions:
    attribute - processingrole, topicusage, topicrole ...
    values - primary/extra, useful/notReadable, render/accessContent, ...
    
    Maybe somebody else can think of better values?
    
    Robert D Anderson
    IBM Authoring Tools Development
    Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit
    
    "Su-Laine Yeo" 


  • 12.  RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref

    Posted 02-13-2009 21:38
    I like the distinction of being a only a resource as 
    opposed to being treated normally (e.g., rendered).
    
    So I lean toward attribute values of "resource-only" 
    (or resourceonly or resourceOnly) and "normal", the
    latter being the default, of course.
    
    For the attribute name, usage or any of those Robert
    mentions (processingrole, topicusage, topicrole) would
    be okay with me.
    
    paul
    
    > 


  • 13.  Re: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref pushand anchorref

    Posted 02-16-2009 16:56
    On 2/13/09 3:36 PM, "Grosso, Paul" 


  • 14.  RE: [dita] Map structure and possible new attribute for conref push and anchorref

    Posted 02-17-2009 15:03
    I'm fine with the name "processingrole" and resourceonly/normal as
    values.
    I have a slight preference for secondary/primary as the names of the
    values.
    
    Thanks Robert for the great summary, btw!
    
    Su-Laine