[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [dita] Use of "claims to be DITA aware": Why I Said It Like That
Bruce and Eliot, A couple of points/questions: From Bruce: > > My thinking: A list of features is useful to vendors because > it helps to level the marketing field, but it is not essential > for the TC when it is called upon to judge partial conformance. > > <snip> > > This presumes that we do have a process in place that brings > vendors before us for judgement of their marketing claims > (there's that word). > What do you mean by "judging" marketing claims? I may have missed this being a relative newcomer, but I didn't think the TC was planning to take an active role in judging conformance. If it is, that needs to be part of the conformance statement (it isn't in the version I reviewed). As an aside, I'd be really cautious about giving the TC an active role in judging marketing claims; even with automated procedures, I think it would be a major time sink. Regarding feature lists, I think requiring implementers to document their degree of conformance in some form, even if they can't enumerate features from a list provided by the TC, is a good thing. Anyone evaluating DITA implementations will want it. While a checklist from a known feature list would be ideal (and might be doable by pointing people to the Adoption TC's list), I don't think the lack of a list should stop the TC from requiring implementers to document their claims. Best, Dick --------------------------------- XML Press XML for Technical Communicators http://xmlpress.net (970) 231-3624
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]