[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] clarifying the href attribute in the language reference
"Eliot Kimber" <ekimber@innodata-isogen.com> wrote on 05/17/2007 07:24:26 PM: > Grosso, Paul wrote: > > > Fine, that's saying something. That's all I'm asking. > > (We don't have a global statement in DITA analogous to > > XML's not well-formed statement, so it's not clear in > > general what should happen when a DITA document doesn't > > conform to the constraints in the DITA standard.) > > I think I understand what Paul is getting at and I agree with all his > suggestions. I also take his point that people will blame the tool that > correctly fails where others don't if the spec is not clear. > > That's also interesting about the MIME type--and I agree we should let > that sleeping dog snore until we can do the right thing, which will be > 2.0 at the earliest. To enable us to bring this discussion to a proposal, then, I just want to point out that Mary McRae is about to launch the ballot for formal TC approval of the 1.1 Committee Specification (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/process.php#3.3), which we don't want to put at risk. The process at this point is under the following procedural contraints: The TC that originated the specification may resolve by Special Majority Vote to withdraw the proposed specification at any point after it is submitted to the TC Administrator for administrative processing and before the start of the voting period. No part of the submission may be changed or altered in any way after being submitted to the TC Administrator, including by Errata or corrigenda. Errata, corrigenda or other changes to a Committee Specification are not permitted after its submission for OASIS Standard approval; if changes are required the Committee Specification must be withdrawn by the TC, edited, re-approved as a Committee Specification, and then may be resubmitted as a proposed OASIS Standard. Proposed changes of any kind to a Committee Draft or Committee Specification may be maintained by a Technical Committee, but do not have any approval status until incorporated into a revised Committee Draft or Committee Specification. So I think this discussion falls into "proposed changes" considerations for 1.2, but at least we can document them early in the process as a separate Committee Draft that we can associate on the TC's home page. Paul, would you or Eliot care to take a stab at a draft for the TC? I don't think there is an urgent schedule requirement if the work scope is small enough to make this a "simple" inclusion for the 1.2 list of work. Regards, -- Don Day Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee IBM Lead DITA Architect Email: dond@us.ibm.com 11501 Burnet Rd. MS9033E015, Austin TX 78758 Phone: +1 512-838-8550 T/L: 678-8550 "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?" --T.S. Eliot
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]