I’d be open to that. I’ve worked with more than one authoring group who abandoned relationship tables because they felt they were too difficult to manage and keep up-to-date, especially for large publications. Seems like an area ripe for consideration in 2.0. Chris On 10/27/16, 2:31 AM, "
dita@lists.oasis-open.org on behalf of Kristen James Eberlein" <
dita@lists.oasis-open.org on behalf of
kris@eberleinconsulting.com> wrote: If I am authoring a topic not in a map context, I need to use <related-links> for links to Web sites. If the topic later becomes part of a map, I often will want to manage the link relationships in a relationship table. However, the markup syntax makes moving <related-links> to relationship tables difficult. Is this something that we should consider addressing for DITA 2.0? I do realize that how the DITA-OT PDF2 transform handles this might be something to consider ... -- Best, Kris Kristen James Eberlein Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
www.eberleinconsulting.com +1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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