dita message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 21 May 2013 uploaded
- From: Nancy Harrison<nharrison@infobridge-solutions.com>
- To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 09:40:53 -0700 (PDT)
Submitter's message
Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 21 May 2013
Recorded by N. Harrison
regrets: Chris Nitchie, Michael Boses, Scott Hudson
Standing Business
=================
Minutes from last meetings:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00020.html (14 May, Hamilton)
Proposed by Don, seconded by Stan, approved by TC
Subcommittee Reports:
None:
Next month 4 June - SIDSC
Announcements:
none
Business
========
1. DITA 1.3 progress
Progress between 13-21 May, https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00033.html (Eberlein)
Update on deadlines: http://chris.nitchie.com/trellotrack/#511a73d76ee890a51c0007ed
Trello Board: https://trello.com/b/gPKH0OcF
Kris reviewed status; Eliot will move a number of his deadlines.
2. DITA 1.3 proposals, stage 2: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DITA_1.3_Proposals-stage2
Ready for discussion:
13041: Cross-deliverable linking (Kimber) (resume discussion following web session)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201304/msg00071.html (DITA, uploaded 28 April)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201304/msg00072.html (HTML, uploaded 28 April)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201304/msg00070.html (PDF, uploaded 28 April)
The TC picked up the discussion from last week. Now that everyone who was interested has had a chance to see/hear Eliot's presentation on it, there were no more further questions about it. Eliot and Michael acknowledged each other's (and ChrisN's) work on the issue.
Resolution: Vote next week.
Ready for vote: Voting options are "Yes," "No," "No objections," "I don't understand the proposal," and "I have reservations"
13092: ph in indexterm (Kimber)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00005.html (DITA, uploaded 7 May)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00006.html (PDF, uploaded 7 May)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00007.html (HTML, uploaded 7 May)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00008.html (working vocabulary modules, Kimber)
Results: item was approved unamimously
yes: Robert Anderson, Deb Bissantz, Thile Buchholz, Don Day, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, Dick Hamilton, Nancy harrison, David helfinstine, Eliot Kimber, Tom Magliery, Mark Myers, Michael Priestley, Adrian Warman
3. DITA 1.3 proposals, stage 3: https://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DITA_1.3_Proposals-stage3
Ready to assign reviewers
None
Discussion
None
Ready for vote: Voting options are "Yes," "No," and "Abstain"
None
4. New ITEM: Question from Eliot re. mathML:
"Should I prepare a separate proposal for the equation domain or add it to the existing MathML proposal (13111)?"
Eliot said that including the equation domain makes it a pretty large and complex proosal, but it seems to be natural to include it.
Robert noted that he'd prefer separating them, if it would make it go faster, admittedly a self-seving impulse, but he doesn't really think it's a technical problem to do so.
Eliot noted that he's already done the work on both, but he hasn't pulled the equation work into the proposal; he's sent details to the TC. It would only take a couple of days to have something usable on the whole thing. His preference is to put them together.
There were no objections.
Resolution; Eliot will include equations domain with MathML proposal
5. New ITEM: Proposal 13007: New values for @toc attribute
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00019.html (Anderson, 14 May)
Robert gave an ovrview of the proposal. [Cascading values in TOC generally give what's expected, but occasionally not, if someone else has specifically turned them on/off. This proposal gives specific instructions on whether it can be altered or not.]
He's not quite sure how his name got attached to this as 'owner' but he would like to remove it, since this isn't an item he considers wvery important and he's already busy with other proposals.
Kris; You should feel free to take your name off it, if you have more important things to do.
Robert; Thanks, I will, unless Michael knows of a compelling IBM reason to keep it.
MichaelP: I'll go with what you've said.
Resolution: Robert has moved this to the 'no champions' list of proposals.
6. New ITEM: Branch filtering (proposal 13059a)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00023.html (Anderson, 15 May)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00024.html (Kimber, 15 May)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00025.html (Nitchie, 15 May)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00029.html,
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00030.html (Anderson, 20 May)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00041.html (Nitchie, 21 May) (Note included documentation of Arbortext implementation)
Robert gave an quick overview, following closely the above documents.
- Kris; as someone whose tried to do this without the functionality proposed in 13059a, I can say that it's really incredibly cumbersome.
- Eliot; what is the intended behavior? have topicref that is root of subtree; i associate with that topicref 2 or more ditaval file; for each ditaval file, the set of topics will be generated, so multiple publishing will be done.
the utility seems pretty compelling
- Robert; MP where in IBM did this come from? I think the install/config options were compelling.
- MichaelP; We had new guidelines for install content to treat it consistently; once the user picks a branch, there are no more flags to read.
- Kris; without the solution Robert's suggesting, it's really hard; you have to make generate different topics and conrefs in the same content output.
- Eliot; We probably need some guidelines for creating file names.
robert; if you do this and someone does a search, they need to know which branch to read.
- Eliot; That's a presentation style detail. I'd like to separate the 2 pieces:
1. the ability to associate a DITAVAL with any topic in a map
2. implicit multiple processing; we need to work thru enough use cases to get at edge cases and get the processing right. For example, if I have 3 topicrefs referencing a key, each referencing a topic file, will I get the right output?
The key is to not really make authors actually copy a branch
- Robert; Eliot, are you asking for 2 separate stage 2 proposals?
- Eliot; no, I just need both pieces called out in the proposal
- Robert; The issue is 'how to call out the topicref?' Since it's a specialization of , we'll have the same problem as with 'sort as' a couple of weeks ago; the new thing will end up appearing in multiple contexts.
- Eliot; would it be possible to introduce it only in the context of topicmeta?
- Robert; That could be done as a new element within 'map'.
- Eliot; It could still be a specialization of data, but one that's defined in ditabase map, rather than ditabase topic
- MichaelP; That would make problems for someone who's already specialized 'topicmeta'
- Eliot; yeah, they would have to update their doc shells, but as it stands, every time we release a new version of DITA, folks really have to update their shells anyway.
- Robert; OK, i have enough to put together a real proposal now, will do so
7. Continued ITEM: Proposal for improved table accessibility
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201303/msg00085.html (Hudson, 29 March)
Question was whether to remove this from agenda:
Kris asked whether anyone was working on this; if there's no interest, it should come off the agenda.
DickH noted that the Docbook TC is still actively considering this, under the guidance of Scott Hudson, so we should keep tracking it.
Don suggested moving it up in the agenda so that we can discuss it at a meeting when Scott is here.
Dick will be talking to Scott tomorrow at DocBook TC meeting; will let him know.
8. Continuing item: ITS:locNote
Question was whether to remove this from agenda:
Kris noted that the proposal is really incompatible with our structure?
Resolution; consensus was to remove this from the agenda
9. Continuing item: Aggregated minutes and TC action items
Aggregated minutes: Would they be helpful?
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201302/msg00054.html (Eberlein, 18 February 2013)
Prototype, PDF: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/48337/DITA-TC-minutes-2013.pdf
Prototype, sample Wiki page: AggregatedMinutes
Tracking action items: Kavi versus a Trello board
Question was whether to remove this from agenda:
Kris; wrt aggregated minutes, the least labor-intensive method is putting it in a wiki, but that's also the least accurate and least functional.
Don; the question is whether the value is worth the effort
Kris; in any case, this is very low-priority, and we have plenty of other things to do.
Resolution: this will be removed from agenda
10. Continuing item: DITA TC processes for creating OASIS-branded documents/Contains and Contains By tables
Update from Robert Anderson, Mark Meyers, and others who participated in offline discussion?
"Chunked" spec packages will require different versions of the tables for each package ...
Question was whether to remove this from agenda:
Kris; while we're not mnaking any current progress on this, it's very important for getting 1.3 done, so let's leave this here at the bottom
Resolution: this will stay on the agenda, at the bottom.
Meeting closed at noon
-- Nancy Harrison
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]