[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]