[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: OASIS DITA Technical Standards Subcommittee - Meeting Minutes
Thanks for taking the minutes, Rick.
I've updated the Requirements and Use Cases page with information about the
DITA and OASIS templates (hoping that Mary or Robin can correct or
supplement the OASIS template description):
http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/techstdsRequirements
Thanks -
Robert D Anderson
IBM Authoring Tools Development
Chief Architect, DITA Open Toolkit
Rick Heil
<rheil@amcanet.co
m> To
Mary McRae
12/16/2008 04:55 <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>,
PM "dcarlson@xmlmodeling.com"
<dcarlson@xmlmodeling.com>,
"dita-techstds@lists.oasis-open.org
"
<dita-techstds@lists.oasis-open.org
>, Rick Heil <rheil@amcanet.com>,
"tdeakins@amcanet.com"
<tdeakins@amcanet.com>, Brian R
Bokor/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, Donald
Buddenbaum/Durham/IBM@IBMUS, Rich
Rogers/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, Robert D
Anderson/Rochester/IBM@IBMUS, Bill
Trippe <bill@gilbane.com>
cc
Subject
OASIS DITA Technical Standards
Subcommittee - Meeting Minutes
Hello all,
Here are my rough meeting minutes from today’s somewhat abstract
conversation about what we are hoping to do and how to get there. We made
good progress indeed. If my notes are missing anything or anyone on the
call should you wish to elaborate – please do!
The key outcome was a path forward – Robert is setting up a wiki page to
begin documenting the components/parts of a specification starting with the
general OASIS spec template and then adding the actual DITA spec to that
analysis. The expectation is by creating a content list of all the elements
of several specs we should be able to tease out a common pattern we can
build a requirements and potential specialization(s) around.
Cheers,
Rick
-----------------
DITA Meeting Notes…
Robert took attendance and posted to the OASIS site/
Approval of minutes from last meeting – motion to approved, seconded, and
approved.
New Business Discussion
Discussed getting our arms around scope and approach to take in defining a
DITA technical toolkit
Initial core focus is on the following spec deliverable “forms”
UML Class Diagrams and potentially other UML artifacts (like
collaboration diagrams, etc.0
XSD Schema (XSD) especially for defining message detail/structure
DITA for narrative portion specs primarily for human readable
content, the ‘meaning’ metadata like definition, description,
annotation, aliases and so forth.
Ideally would like to be able to achieve a single normative source so every
characteristic of a specification is defined only once in one places then
reference from there – e.g. a tag/element name should be defined in one
place to avoid misspelling
Probably not possible to have a single source, just one tool, but rather
develop a means of easily interchanging information between them – thus
DITA becomes the means of defining much of the human consumable ‘meaning’
data and the structure for defining other metadata needed for message
specification, programming language, etc.
Possible similar to HL7 model – where they use UML, XSD and other tools
with transformation between them.
Idea of going between them – is it a transform back and forth (each their
own domain with translation0 or could DITA be the “Esperanto’ universal
second language of every specification???
What are the parts of a spec that we need to capture?
- Narrative
o Information about metadata around the spec (authors,
version, history)
§ Bookmap
o Resources
o Errata
o Requirements Section
o Use Cases (based on UML Use Cases)
o Diagrams (based on UML Class Diagrams)
- Schema and models for messages, data model
o Detailed description of a message
o API ref may be a starting point.
- Generating java APIs or other coding specs
- Specializations for web services; WSDL, etc.
- Other specializations that are common to spec definition
Goal of having a single normative spec, if achievable
Idea to start with the narrative specialization
Let’s use the actual DITA spec as an example, how do we
document DITA using DITA
Get DITA working then look at an additional spec or 2, 3
and fit them in…
Abstract out the structures they use
Look at the ISO standards and others later
Create a spreadsheet looking at a number of specs?
Decided to instead use a more collaborative approach – use the wiki to
create table(s) of specification elements and see if we can tease out a
common structure sufficient for all/any.
Begin with the ‘master OASIS Specification template’ and
see what it defines, then DITA, then a few others.
Are we saying the DITA becomes not only a publishing view of the semantics
supplementing the technical semantics of a UML model (for example). How
does it relate to a model driven architecture or similar approach, can we
tie them together? Is it also right to think of it being an interchange
format between other specifications? Providing close equivalence between
the way information moves between systems. The DITA content model is more
human readable form (more about ‘meaning’).
Objective of identifying the common intersection between the human readable
semantics with the machine semantics artifacts
Richard J. Heil Jr. CLU, ChFC • Practice Director • Abraham, McDonald
and Associates
Cell: (435) 513-0460 • Office: (435) 578-1297
rheil@amcanet.com • IM Yahoo: rheil29, AOL: rheil260 • Linked In:
http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickheil
(Embedded image moved to file: pic11356.gif)Think before you print.Think
before you print.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
