Argument: Attribute domain tokens allow you to generalize and specialize attributes
It's true. They do. This token has truly been useful since its introduction in DITA 1.1, and is hard to get around.
Attributes don't have their own
If I specialize
@props to create
@pain, and then specialize
@pain to create
@intheneck, the only way for a processor to follow
the specialization hierarchy is to examine the
intheneck). This is important because if I use a DITAVAL to filter out
@pain values, I might plausibly need to recognize them
So to speak.
@intheneck is also plausible, but as unlikely as any other
generalization process. That said, if it needs to happen, the only way to generalize today is to use
We could just say "if you want to specialized one attribute to another, use subject schemes".
They're currently optional and not directly tied to the grammar. But as an existing, valid alternative to an uncommon problem, I'd personally be willing to require a subject scheme instead of requiring ugly domain tokens. Maybe that's just me.