Mark Fletcher wrote: > I asked Don Day directly about the scoping issue and > here's his reply. (He had been ignoring [XXE] mail and didn't see your > cc to him on this subject.) > > "Robert [Anderson] informs me that the unscoped form is actually > correct, and that the conref code in DITA OT is properly handling the > case. I asked him to respond to you and Hussein with the justification, > which is partly explained in the DITA Architectural Spec." > > So XXE's interpretation was correct.
This is very good news for us. > To the subject of the format="ditamap" method of including map > references: I understand you guys are swamped. Yes indeed, we are swamped. > But given the fact that > you delivered conref support WAY earlier than I had ever hoped, I'll > keep my fingers crossed that you might sneak this into 3.4 ;-) (It *is* > frequently used and would probably be a differentiating feature between > XXE and other editors out there. I've posted a question on the > dita-users group to see if anyone else currently supports this.) [The good news] As of v3.3, XXE supports several inclusion mechanisms for a given document type, therefore there should be no technical problem implementing the transclusion of topicref/@href="XXX", at format="ditamap". [The bad news] v3.4=On the fly spell-checking + Integration of DITA OpenToolkit (*if*, as always, we find a simple, elegant and reliable way to implement these features).
