[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: MEETING MINUTES -- 14 February 2006 -- DITA TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES -- 14 February 2006 -- DITA TECHNICAL COMMITTEE (Minutes taken by Seraphim Larsen <seraphim.l.larsen@intel.com>) Date: Tuesday, 14 February 2006 Time: 08:00am - 09:00am PT DITA Technical Committee website: - Public: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=dita - Members only: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/ - Wiki: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/ - Roll call -> We have quorum - Review/approve minutes from previous meeting: - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200602/msg00008.html (7 Feb 2006) - Don moves to accept the minutes as read (and corrected as indicated here -- http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200602/msg00032.html), JoAnn seconds, no objections, minutes approved. - Select a replacement Secretary (admin role) for the TC - Gershon Joseph volunteered. - DECISION: Don proposes that Gershon take over the secretary role, Seraphim seconds, no objections, Gershon is now the new secretary, at least for the interim. - Membership list "cleanup"--what OASIS actually says: - "The rule was modified this past summer to make it much easier to track than the old miss-2-out-of-3. It's now 2-in, 2-out. That is, if you attend 2 meetings in a row, you automatically are granted voting rights for the 3rd meeting. If you miss 2 meetings in a row, you lose voting rights." - Don explained that the attendance tool on the website automatically applies these rules, updates people's status accordingly, and notifies people whose status is changing. - Establish the DITA and Translation Subcommittee (vote): - Goals: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200602/msg00031.html - Don - Proposal is the make this a formal DITA/OASIS subcommittee. - JoAnn -- Set out four goals, as indicated in the message above, and summarized as follows: - (1) Sets up the liasison - (2) Publish guidelines to promote best practices - (3) Add methods to the specs to help vendors/users comply with standards - (4) Add DITA to XLIFF to DITA tool to the DITA TK - PROPOSAL -- JoAnn moves to establish a Translation Subcommittee to the DITA technical committee, with the purpose of attaining these goals. Michael Priestley seconds. No objections, approved by acclamation. - JoAnn -- If anyone wants to be included in the subcommittee, just send an email to JoAnn <joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com> or Don Day <dond@us.ibm.com>. - Agree on process for prioritizing new, composite proposals for DITA 1.1 - SUMMARY: - Don and Seraphim made a proposal for trying to shorten the list of 1.1 items, since things are falling behind. - http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/Consolidated_List_for_Prioritization - Michael Priestley made a counter-proposal, to complete the total list, and move forward with the work. - Michael's proposal carried. - After the list of items is completed and posted, Paul Prescod may make a future proposal, to cut down 1.1 to the key items, and push everything else off to 1.2. - DECISION -- Michael Priestley proposes that we (1) complete the blanket vote on the offlist items, and (2) push ahead on the work, and (3) revisit after a time, and vote whether to drop any items from 1.1 that are falling behind (dropped items to be deferred to 1.2). - Robert Anderson seconds, no objections, approved by acclamation. - Paul Prescod may make a subsequent proposal in the future, after the total list of items is completed, to the effect that we focus on a few key items for 1.1, and push everything else off to 1.2. For now, this is not a formal proposal, but just a comment from Paul. - DISCUSSION: - There are now about 60-70 items on the list for 1.1 - The purpose here is to reprioritize, since the scope of proposals is very broad and progress has been slow. - Michael Priestley (MP) -- Would rather just push ahead and work on things, get things done, don't waste time on the process. - Paul Prescod (PP) -- Mostly agrees with Michael. To go through another prioritization process: If we're just trimming here and there, it just takes too long. If we're cutting the scope in half or by two-thirds, then maybe it's worth it. If we're doing a big cut like that, do we have consensus on what should be cut? - Don -- That just seems like a delta on the proposal that's on the table. - PP -- Yes -- if you are going to prioritize, then you need to align the proposals to your goals. What are the goals for this release? - Don -- Yes, that's another way we can do the cut. - Indi Liepa -- Supports what Paul said, seems to make sense. Better to make progress on key items. - MP -- Would really just like to start working. But we haven't focused in on the right number of work items. Cutting some items out, isn't going to change much, since the work is distributed. Concerned that we're spending too much time on process. If we're going to open up, then let's make a radical cut. But probably better just to push forward, and then cut things that have fallen behind. Premature (and requires too much process) to prioritize things now. - PP -- Let's be aggressive about completing the items that were going to be in 1.1, drop the rest? - MP -- After we have a complete list to look at, if PP can identify the things we can do for an early release, then we can take that approach: finish those high-priority things for a timely 1.1 release, push everything else off to 1.2. - (Previous work on items accepted for DITA 1.1: - http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/AcceptedAndCandidate) - Not covered - ("left off the list" and unnumbered proposals for 1.1 scope: - http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/OffTheList#preview) - Not covered - Announcements/Opens - Not covered <end> ___________________________________________________________ Seraphim Larsen CIG Operations / TPPE Senior Technical Writer Intel Corporation (480) 552-6504 Chandler, AZ The content of this message is my personal opinion only. Although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter. ___________________________________________________________
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]