[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: What should be in the architectural specification?
I am struggling to develop a solid sense of what
should be in the architectural specification. While the 1.1
architectural specification provides a fairly clear statement of what
the document is NOT, it doesn't really nail down what the document
SHOULD provide: "While the specification does contain some introductory information, it is not intended as an introduction to DITA nor as a users guide. The intended audience of this specification consists of implementers of the DITA standard, including tool developers and specializers." Just to throw out a few observations: The architectural spec is very uneven in its coverage. It contains, for example:
Does this material -- perhaps reworked some -- belong in both documents? If so, do we reuse identical content in both contexts? Also, where does the bulk of keyref coverage belong? Per Gershon's spreadsheet, it is slated to be included in the processing topics (id.dita), but I think we also need to cover this in the map topics. Nancy, maybe you and I can discuss this further offline ... I'd be interested in hear people's thoughts about all, information about how the specification documents were originally planned and authored (and intended), and general discussion about this, especially from TC members who have been working on the architectural spec. Kris |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]