Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »
 61 
 on: May 09, 2018, 02:40:51 PM 
Started by Marvin - Last post by Derek Read
My recommendation would be to only make changes using the spell checker's options dialogs then copy those changes to other machines once things are configured as you want them to be.

If you make a change in the dialogs and something is not changed in the registry then leave it as is.

 62 
 on: May 09, 2018, 07:53:38 AM 
Started by Marvin - Last post by Marvin
I'm still quite new to this project, so I'm not exactly sure how this happens and what the consequences are in DITA OT.
But:

Quote
morerows: number of additional rows in a vertical span. There shall be at least that many more rows in the appropriate thead or tbody. Any entries with morerows that would attempt to extend further downward is an error.
Source: http://www.datypic.com/sc/cals/a-nons_morerows.html

That is one of the cases we're trying to catch.
The other thing is namest/nameend:

Quote
It is an error if the namest value is not defined in a colspec for the current tgroup.
http://www.datypic.com/sc/cals/a-nons_namest.html
(the same applies for nameend)

 63 
 on: May 09, 2018, 07:42:15 AM 
Started by Marvin - Last post by Marvin
Thank you very much. I really appreciate the great support you give us.

What is the DefaultUIDialect registry setting for? It doesn't seem to get updated from "EN" to "UK".
Would it make sense to set this to "UK" as well?

 64 
 on: May 08, 2018, 04:22:08 PM 
Started by Marvin - Last post by Derek Read
I'm a bit confused by that oXygen error message. The screenshot shows that in the tgroup @cols="2" so there are two columns. There are also 2 <colspec> elements (so that's consitent). There are two rows and each row has two entry elements (so number of entry elements matches the colspec). I do not see anything that would indicate there are more than 2 cells. Oddly, the error also says something about "row (3)" but there are only two rows shown in this table.

I could imagine a scenario where some authoring tool allowed you to create a table that has too many entry elements in a row, and perhaps that would not be caught by standard XML validation (with DTD). Is that the issue you are trying to show here? Under normal circumstances that would be extremely difficult to do while authoring in XMetaL Author. To do that I think it would be necessary to switch to Plain Text view and then either manually type in the angle brackets, the element name <entry> and other things. Is that something your users need to do? We typically don't see people working with tables that way. Editing in Tags On or Normal view is preferred because the table is rendered as a table and all the various editing features for adding/removing/moving rows and columns make editing easy.

Putting that aside, which transtype are you using that has issues with @morerows?

It sounds to me that if there is an issue with an output transtype when valid XML / DITA / CALS) is passed to it (in the case of the @morerows values) that the issue is with the transformation process itself (ie: there's a bug with the DITA OT transtype). Rather than try to detect and try to avoid issues that trigger a bug in a transtype doesn't it make more sense to log them as bugs with the DITA OT project so they can be corrected?

 65 
 on: May 08, 2018, 03:59:55 PM 
Started by Marvin - Last post by Derek Read
We don't support making modifications to the main word list files and are unable to provide any software for working with them.

So yes, adding words to a UWL and then delivering that is the best option.

...unless you wish to look into using the Hunspell dictionaries. The only true benefit to using Hunspell would be to allow you to limit the words in the main file to words you approve (ie: with the right 3rd party tools, you could create your own files from scratch or remove words from an existing file set). See: http://forums.xmetal.com/index.php/topic,3011.0.html

 66 
 on: May 08, 2018, 03:51:50 PM 
Started by jpcain429 - Last post by Derek Read
You can switch between the installed copies of the DITA OT that are supported in the version of XMetaL Author Enterprise you are using the Configure Output dialog:

1. From the Tools menu select Configure Output...
2. Select the "Advanced" tab.
3. In the "Other output parameters" section locate the settings that begin with "DITA_OT_DIR".
In the case of version 12 I believe two versions of the DITA OT were installed and configured. You can switch between one and the other by adding an underscore to the start of the one you wish to disable and removing it from the one you wish to enable.

That setting effectively points to the folder containing the version of the DITA OT installed by the XMetaL Author Enterprise installer. In theory you can use that setting to point to any version of the DITA OT, but because they have changed significantly over time it isn't possible to support all older versions.

We are now typically including a copy that is as near to the current release of the DITA OT as we can when our software is released plus one or two versions back. Currently (for version 13) that means we include 3.0, 2.4 and 2.0. For version 12 I believe we included version 2.4 and 2.0 (possibly 2.2?)

Major changes to both the functionality and layout (folder structure and files) of the DITA OT were made around version 1.5 through 1.7 or so, making them quite incompatible with older releases, and custom changes you have made to older release would need to take those changes into account. From what I know the newer releases from about that point onward (1.8 through 3.0) have been quite stable as far as folder layout and file naming is concerned.

 67 
 on: May 08, 2018, 08:33:08 AM 
Started by jpcain429 - Last post by jpcain429
We have an older DITA OpenToolkit (version 1.4) that we still use for our custom DITA-OT plugins.  We are upgrading from XMetaL Author 8 to XMetaL Author 12, and after initial install of XMetaL Author 12 and the incorporation of our older DITA-OT, we run into the following error when we try to run one of our custom transform types:

org.dita.dost.exception.DITAOTException: [DOTJ002F][FATAL] Unsupported parameter '/args.filter'. Please refer to User Guide for supported parameters.

Is XMetaL Author 12 no longer supporting older DITA-OT versions?  Or, is there a configuration somewhere to force backward compatibility?

Thanks,

Jim

 68 
 on: May 08, 2018, 03:40:22 AM 
Started by Marvin - Last post by Marvin
We have some issues with the DITA OT PDF generator when cells overlap or when attributes like "morerows" would span outside the bounds of the table (e.g. the table only has 2 rows, but morerows=7, etc.).

This is correctly detected by said Schematron in Oxygen:

 69 
 on: May 08, 2018, 03:18:35 AM 
Started by Marvin - Last post by Marvin
I guess we can also just ship a modified system word list (under C:\Program Files (x86)\Corel\Shared\XMetaL\Writing Tools\10.0)?
But what's the best way to modify that file?
Shall we just update the user word list on one machine and then ship that as WT10EN.UWL (or WT10UK.UWL?)?
Thank you.

 70 
 on: May 07, 2018, 07:16:02 PM 
Started by Marvin - Last post by Derek Read
The Java error displayed when attempting to use this Schematron (which appears to have been specifically written to solve some issue that DeltaXML identified with oXygen) is probably because Saxon-CE 1.1* (which is the engine XMetaL Author 13 uses) does not support namespaces. It is also possibly because this implementation does not support includes.

If you could define the things you wish to check for I could try to provide a sample Schematron you could extend for specific use with XMetaL Author.


*Saxon-CE 1.1 docs: http://www.saxonica.com/ce/user-doc/1.1/index.html

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »
email us