[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Minutes from DITA TC meeting on 1 August 2009
|
DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes ======================================== The DITA Technical Committee met on 1 September 2009 at 08:00am PT for 60 minutes. Chaired by Don Day <dond@us.ibm.com> Minutes recorded by Gershon Joseph <gerjosep@cisco.com> Roll call > Quorum was achieved. Approve minutes from previous business meetings: * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200908/msg00179.html (25 August 2009, Gershon) > Minutes approved by acclamation. Subcommittee/liaison reports (as needed) > None this week. > Next week the Adoption TC will provide an update. ITEM: DITA 1.2 specification (Revised for the September 1 TC meeting, Eberlein) * Business: * Outstanding action items: * Add hazard-statement graphics to applicable lang ref topics (Kravogel) > Chris: I've created some proposals and sent them to the MI SC to > review them. We meet after this TC meeting and I hope to get a decision > allowing me to deliver final images tomorrow. * Documenting how to generate the "Contains" and "Contains by" sections (Anderson, due 1 September 2009) > Robert: The information is there, but the sections I added got > overwritten. I need to add the conrefs back in. > Don: Authors, please check that you have the latest version locally from > SVN before you make updates, to avoid overwriting newer versions. > ACTION: Kris to contact folks who overwrote others' files > Authors who make an edit must check in ASAP after making the changes, and > if they need to keep the file open for a longer period of time, they > should lock the file. * Add work item about "Map element IDs and references to them" to applicable Wiki page (Eberlein) ITEM: Order for lang ref files * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200908/msg00101.html (Eberlein) * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200908/msg00154.html (Priestley) * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200909/msg00009.html (Eberlein) > Kris: Initially I ordered them alphabetically. Michael suggested that may not > be the most logical reading order. My most recent email (last bullet link > above) contains links to graphics showing some prototypes for discussion. > The TC agreed to move concept, task and reference elements up one level and > remove the "Topic elements" wrapper from the Technical content map. > The TC agreed to rename "Map elements" in the Technical content map to > "Bookmap elements". > Jeff: When we say "task" do we mean the task doctype shell or are we talking > about the task topic type? We're doing a little bit of both in the section, > so we need to be clear in the spec when whether we're talking about one or > the other. > Kris: We're talking about the lang ref, so it should be OK. Suggested > shelving this discussion until we're looking at the actual content rather > than the TOC alone. > Kris asked the TC to consider the Base TOC - where should I put "Table > elements"? I dumped it under "Topic elements". > The TC agreed it's best to keep it where it is. > The second last container in "Base" is "Other elements" -- can we come up > with a better name? > Michael: Elements common to map and topic are not called out right now. > Robert: We now have almost all topic elements in map too. So not sure we can > do this. > Michael: We should open a DITA 1.3 bug to limit <desc> to only topics. > ACTION: Michael to add an entry for this bug to the 1.3 feature list Wiki. > If anyone on the TC has a better name for "Other elements" please suggest one > on the email list. > CONTINUED. ITEM: CTR not universal (was packaging of glossaries) * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200908/msg00135.html (Grantham/Kimber) * Sub discussion: Packaging discussion (spawned from "packaging of glossaries") * Sub discussion: Semantics of CTR, role of business documents, etc. > Nothing for 1.2 spec. Don to remove from agenda. New ITEM: @lockmeta and help convergence * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200909/msg00001.html > Eliot: The 1.2 spec is not clear on what @lockmeta actually means and in > addition what the effective default value is. When reviewing it again last > night I posted what I thought was meant, but then Jeff posted from the 1.1 > arch spec that made it less clear -- indicating the default value is "yes" > meaning the topicref metadata takes precedence over the topic metadata, to > which Jeff added some additional questions indicating @lockmeta is not fully > cooked. > In the context of help discussion, Tony indicated they have a requirement for > controlling the propagation of a specific metadata value. @lockmeta was not > intended for this. So the help item becomes a 1.3 discussion. For 1.2 at a > minimum we need to ensure the language in the arch spec and lang ref > correctly reflects the design intent of @lockmeta. Topic metadata for > topicref and topic get merged and that becomes the effective metadata for > that topic and topicref -- but @lockmeta does not say this. > Kris: The current 1.2 spec has a clear statement [I didn't capture the exact phrase Kris read--Ed] "by default, metadata in the map overrides... unless lockmeta is set to no" in a topic called "Metadata in maps and topics". > Jeff: This information is correct. This is the same language that's leading > Eliot to his interpretation of the intended behavior. In many cases there > cannot be a conflict because the metadata can merge. Only if there's a > conflict does the processor need to merge. So we need to make this clear. > There are some questions that I raised that come out of this: (e.g. is > shortdesc a special case?) > Kris: navtitle and shortdesc are special cases which are documented in their > topics, but we don't say it here. Jeff would like us to say this here too. > Eliot: The lang ref for @lockmeta needs to be updated to match what the arch > spec says. > Jeff: When we say "metadata" we don't clarify what we mean. We should be > explicit and state what it includes. > Kris: The same topic states clearly where metadata can be applied. > Jeff: Does it say whether @lockmeta applies to all of them or just some of them? > Kris: I need to check and track this. Suggested Eliot looks at this topic to > check whether it adequately covers his concerns. > Jeff: The main thing to check is to ensure this is clearly mentioned in > the @lockmeta discussion. Eliot suggested as long as there's a xref to this > info it's OK, and Jeff agreed to this. > Stan: There are some specific use cases we rely on in the help SC that we > need to check. > The TC agreed that this is out of scope for 1.2, since the help SC usage is > for 1.3. >CLOSED. New item: "Introduction to DITA" topics * http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/email/archives/200909/msg00006.html (Eberlein) * http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/email/archives/200909/msg00007.html (Joseph) * http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/email/archives/200909/msg00008.html (Kimber) > Kris: Eliot suggested moving the topic from the arch spec to the overall doc (now that we've merged the arch and lang specs). > Those of us authoring the spec need to discuss the intro and overview material, but we can have that discussion on the list. > CONTINUE discussion on list. >CONTINUED. *** Meeting Adjourned ***
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]