Multi-level lists

[jelovirt]

Multi-level lists

[jelovirt]

Sounds reasonable. I will implement this to be the default.

[jelovirt]

Mapping different styles to different list item depths is something that you currently have to override. Again, since there is no single one answer for this, it's left to the customization to handle it.

[mhGLEIF]

I would suggest to standardize it to the built-in Word styles that appear in a fresh copy of normal.dotm:

Is this something the user community is expected to do?

I'm intending to learn XSLT in depth but I as far as I can understand these tweaks would not be a lot of work for someone who already knows - maybe oxygen can get it done somehow?

[mhGLEIF]

This is extremely helpful!

Sorry for the long exchange - sometimes even a technical writer is not able to explain their requirements as clearly as they'd like ;-)

[dagoss]

Would this be expected to affect <task> elements too, or are we just talking about basic list elements like <ol> and <ul>?

For example:

<steps>
    <step>
        <cmd>This is "List Number"</cmd>
        <info>This is "List Continue"</info>
    </step>
    <step>
        <cmd>This is "List Number"</cmd>
        <substeps>
            <substep>
                <cmd>This is "List Number 2"</cmd>
                <info>This is "List Continue 2"</cmd>
             </substep>
        </substep>
    </step>
    <step>
        <cmd>This is "List Number"</cmd>
        <choices>
            <choice>This is "List Bullet 2"</choice>
        </choice>
    </step>
</steps>

[mhGLEIF]

@dagoss I was assuming just ol and ul because they are semantic-free and could therefore reasonably be expected to behave like Word styles (which are almost all semantic free).

There's no Word style that uniquely / directly corresponds to most of the DITA semantic elements. That doesn't mean your suggestion is not a good idea, but I don't know how much effort that would take to implement, plus at a certain point maybe you have to make choices about what the semantics will be (?).

codeph might work as e.g. HTML Code (which I'd suggest) but I will admit I don't know what all the other Word HTML _____ styles mean.