[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: MEETING MINUTES -- 31 AUG 2004 -- DITA TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES -- 31 AUG 2004 -- DITA TECHNICAL COMMITTEE -- *** Please see Action Items and Decision Summary at the end *** ** Agenda ** ------------ 1. Roll call 2. Review/approve minutes from 24 August - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200408/msg00093.html 3. Spec review process (need Michael and JoAnn) 4. Resume discussion on current issues (deferred from last week): - Namespace for DITA? - Which version of CALS table model? - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200408/msg00042.html - Conref and XInclude? (no recent discussion--is this "in" or "out"? - S1000D - long term recommendations? - for spec: general separation of class architecture from implementation vocabularies - Terminology - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200408/msg00064.html - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200408/msg00099.html 5. DTD cleanup - Alignment convention (elements, attributes, comments, etc.) - Testing the DTDs and Schemas 6. AOB? ** Minutes ** ------------- 1. Roll call - Members: Paul Grosso, Yas Etessam, Mike Wethington, Wendy Hambledon, Michael Priestley, David Schell, Paul Antonov, JoAnn Hackos, Mary McRae, Deborah Lapeyre, Eliot Kimber, Seraphim Larsen, Bruce Esrig, Robin Cover, Sharon Veach, Don Day - We do have quorum (16/22) - Observers and visitors: David Brainard, Nancy Harrison, Tyde Richards 2. Review/approve minutes from 24 August - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200408/msg00093.html - No comments; action items were reviewed. - Minutes approved. 3. Spec review process (need Michael and JoAnn) - Don updated Michael on the review process we adopted last meeting. - Michael and JoAnn would like all comments to come directly to both of them. - Nothing more to discuss. 4. Resume discussion on current issues (deferred from last week): - Namespace for DITA? - Which approach should we take? - Put it in the spec? -- How much can we afford to put into the spec this time around? - Just recommend a "best practice"? -- What "best practices" can we recommend for those who require namespaces? - Discussion -- - Eliot -- Eliot summarized the discussion of this topic that's been taking place on the list. - Don -- Let's create a subcommittee to work on this issue and come to a conclusion. It would include Michael, Eliot, and Erik. Bruce Esrig would like to put forward some questions for them also. - Action Required for Don -- Get this set up. - Which version of CALS table model? - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200408/msg00042.html - Discussion -- - Don conducted an IBM survery -- Yes, there will be a migration hit, and it will not be painless. But we want to make the right choice. - Don -- Is there any remaining desire for the CALS table model? - Michael -- CALS doesn't handle some DITA-specific table features. - Don -- Yes, it will need to be "DITAfied" - Michael -- As long as we have the DITA attributes added and the row header attributes added, then it looks OK to him. - Michael -- He thinks the target should be the CALS Exchange Model with some DITA stuff added. - Debbie -- She wanted to support the choice of CALS Exchange Model also. - Don -- Any other discussion on CALS vs. CALS Exchange? It seems the proposal on the table is to adopt the CALS Exchange model instead of the full CALS model. - Proposal -- Adopt the CALS Exchange model with the addition of some DITA-specific attributes and structure. - No objections - Approved by acclamation. - Conref and XInclude? (no recent discussion--is this "in" or "out"? - Discussion -- - Don -- Where are we on this discussion? - Recommends that we stay with Conref for now and make a comment on the difficulties of including XInclude. - Paul Grosso -- XInclude does some things that Conref doesn't do. But this has nothing to do with DITA per se -- it is an XML thing. We probably don't need to say anything about it at all in the DITA spec, except perhaps some comments about *why* we're not saying anything. Is there any reason we should say that people should *not* use XInclude? - Eliot -- Trying to change the definition of conref at this point in time is not practical. - Don -- The proposal, then, would not to conflate conref with xinclude or vice-versa, but to keep conref and add an FAQ explaining that xinclude is an XML technology that can be used with DITA. - Proposal -- No relationship needs to be stated between conref and xinclude; we will keep conref in the 1.0 spec, and add an FAQ explaining that xinclude is an XML technology that can be used with DITA. - No objections to this wording - Approved by acclamation. - S1000D - Not covered -- no time. - Terminology - Not covered -- no time. 5. DTD cleanup - Not covered -- no time. 6. Face-to-face meeting? - Not covered -- no time. 7. AOB? - Not covered -- no time. ** Summary of Decisions ** -------------------------- - Decided -- To adopt the CALS Exchange model with the addition of some DITA-specific attributes and structure. - Decided -- No relationship needs to be stated between conref and xinclude; we will keep conref in the 1.0 spec, and add an FAQ explaining that xinclude is an XML technology that can be used with DITA. ** Action Required ** --------------------- 017 Shawn Jordan -- Post to the TC list his ideas about general extensibility and the creation of new elements not necessarily descended from the Topic element. Still open (not an immediate deliverable -- for post-1.0). 021 JoAnn Hackos, Michael Priestley -- Summarize the discussion of substitution and post to the TC list. Still pending as of 7/20/04. 022 Don, Michael -- Put together a "self-study" tutorial/demo, as per JoAnn's comments regarding the DITA sessions. Still pending as of 7/20/04. 026 Michael -- See how Conref and XInclude contrast with SGML. Still pending as of 7/20/04. 036 Shawn Jordan -- Investigate where to point the DITA namespace -- where does the URL point? Maybe an OASIS page that describes what DITA does, etc. Still pending 8/17/04. 040 Don -- Cull the past minutes and discussion list to create an inventory of all the things we need to close on in order to create the 1.0 spec. Create a list of these items and post it in the Documents area of the website. >>> This will be ongoing. 042 All -- Consider need for and practicality of 2-3 day face-to-face meeting in late October in order to resolve final technical issues in advance of final editorial work. >>> On agenda for today, 8/31/04. 043 Michael Priestley -- Add a straw-man audience statement to the introduction. 046 Don? -- Incorporate review comments from today's discussion into the 1.0 draft (8/17/04). 047 Erik Hennum -- Start discussion on the TC list about separating the spec into two specs -- one for the architecture and one for the implementation vocabulary. <<< Closed as of 8/31/04. 048 Eliot and Deborah -- Start discussion on the TC list about the formatting of the DTD/schemas. <<< Closed as of 8/31/04. 049 Don Day -- Start discussion on the TC list about testing the DTD/schemas and developing a "test suite". <<< Closed as of 8/31/04. 050 Don Day -- Start a subcommittee to resolve the namespace issues. New as of 8/31/04. ** Issues to be Resolved ** --------------------------- 005 All -- What should the scope and length of the conceptual introduction be? >>> We'll get this from JoAnn. 006 All -- Should DITA specialization mechanism be documented in a separate specification in order to make it easier to use in other XML applications that otherwise have no relationship to topic-based writing? >>> Ongoing. 007 All -- Decide which version of the CALS table model to use -- either the full CALS model, or the CALS Exchange model. >>> Resolved 8/31/04 -- see Decisions. 008 Namespace Subcommittee -- Decide namespace issues. New as of 8/31/04. <END>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]