Conditions versus transclusion
Transclusion, or content referencing, can sometimes achieve the same publishing aim as conditional processing. There are pros and cons for either method.
There are single-source publishing scenarios where a desired result can be achieved with either conditional processing or with transclusion (the conref feature).
For example, if a product name was going to vary between two choices
		from publication to publication, conditional processing with a product
		attribute could be used to exclude the inappropriate product name (to leave the
		appropriate product name). The code might look like: 
		<ph product="Liberty">Liberty><ph
		  product="Legend">Legend</ph>. When a ditaval rule of exclude
		elements with a product attribute of Liberty is applied, the remaining code
		would be 
		<ph product="Legend">Legend</ph>. 
	 
The alternative approach would be to use transclusion, such as through a
		content reference (conref) to achieve the same result. The product
		name would not be included directly in the text; instead, a conref would be
		used to draw the phrase in from a separate conref file. The code might look
		like: 
		<ph conref="conref_source/product_name" />. When a
		publication for the product with a name of 
		Legend
 is required, the conref source file could be modified so
		that the conref source code was: 
		<ph id="product_name">Legend</ph>. 
	 
The keyref feature introduced in DITA 1.2 makes this second transclusion method a lot easier and cleaner.
There are pros and cons with either approach.
- all variations are visible to the author
 - a review version of the document can be produced that shows all variations
 
- topics are easier for an author to read
 - doesn't rely on metadata
 - easier to maintain if new variations are introduced (only the conref source file needs to be updated)
 - can cope better with large numbers of conditions