I commented on the GitHub issue, but bringing this to the SC at Carlos's suggestion -- This raises the question -- How do we handle LwDITA-specific items like this in the specs and grammar files? For a stand-alone LwDITA implementation, this is easy (LwDITA spec; LwDITA grammar files). But a DITA processor that also supports LwDITA must recognize these @format attribute values, that are not listed in the DITA spec and are not legal per the DITA grammar files. Even if the DITA grammar changes necessary to support LwDITA are minor and localized, I can't think of a good way to handle them in DTD-land (which is where my expertise lies). I don't believe anybody intends to make LwDITA support mandatory in DITA 2.0. But perhaps we can or should bake these attribute values into the DITA spec and grammar files, for DITA processors that also support LwDITA ? -Alan On 2/21/19 11:26 AM, Carlos Evia wrote: Dear LwDITA SC members, Robert ( don't call me Bobby ) Anderson contacted me with the following issue posted by Radu ( don't call me George ) Coravu to the GH repo with the LwDITA plugin for the OT:
https://github.com/jelovirt/org.lwdita/issues/45 In essence, Radu is asking about a format descriptor to reference a LwDITA map (MDITA in this case) from a DITA map. I think hditamap and mditamap seem pretty harmless as descriptors. We already have mdita and hdita as format values for topics (see section 5.4.1, Cross-format example: XDITA map, in our committee note). Thoughts? Objections to Jarno proceeding with those descriptors for LwDITA maps when needed? Best, Carlos -- Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Communication Chair, Hispanic/Latino Faculty & Staff Caucus Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 -- Alan Houser Group Wellesley, Inc. Consultant and Trainer, Technical Publishing arh on Twitter 412-450-0532