On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Hussein Shafie <hussein at xmlmind.com>wrote:
> > The only > > difference here is that we're using custom/specialized conditionals > > instead of the ones hard-coded in DITA. > > > > This is already working! at the DITA xml level, > > So you confirm that, using ditac (i.e. not the ODT), there is currently > *no* *problem* performing any kind of filtering/flagging you want, as > long as you specify the conditionals at the DITA xml level (e.g. a > paragraph). > Yes, that is correct. In fact, it works even if you do not specialize the DTD files. We learned that several months ago and it was a great boon to getting started because we didn't have to change anything, we could just make up new attributes and values and put them into the ditaval files and it -just-worked-. Of course now that we are finishing our conversion process and looking to move forward, we want to specialize so that our tools can help our authors. The fact that DITAC is not a validating processor means we have to run the Open Toolkit to make sure we haven't made any mistakes, so it is a mixed bag. > This would take almost as long as really fixing the problem. If you > confirm the above status, may be the problem is not as severe as we > first thought it was. > Yes, confirmed above. That sounds like good news! > The first step for us will be to learn more about the "props" attribute > and how it may be used to specify extra conditional processing > attributes. (I'm just guessing: despite the fact that I've read the DITA > spec several times, I don't remember *anything* related to this.) > The props attribute is what the new conditionals inherit from, it isn't meant to be used directly (just as topic is not meant to be used directly). We'll happily accept any contribution which truly improves ditac, > especially if this improves the *looks* of what is generated by ditac. > We are still far from the typographic quality of what was generated by > FrameMaker. > OK. I won't be looking into that until next week, and will start a new thread(s) on this list as appropriate. Foremost concern is deciding how to resolve the above issue. Thanks! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.xmlmind.com/pipermail/ditac-support/attachments/20100326/d244cdb8/attachment.htm
