Re: [dita] Status of 13089: Is Better Than I Represented It

[Kristen James Eberlein <kris@eberleinconsulting.com>]

As long as the spec topics are in the package, I don't care whether they 
are separate topics or within a ditabase topic, as in the proposal 
template :)

Best,
Kris

Kristen James Eberlein
Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
Co-chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Charter member, OASIS DITA Adoption Committee
www.eberleinconsulting.com
+1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)

On 6/4/2013 3:08 PM, Eliot Kimber wrote:
> I am having a bad day: the reference topics *are* in the proposal doc, as
> well as available as separate files. So I think the minimum V3 requirements
> are met.
>
> My apologies to Mark and Doug for misrepresenting the state of their
> proposal.
>
> Cheers,
>
> E.
>
> On 6/4/13 1:47 PM, "Eliot Kimber" <ekimber@rsicms.com> wrote:
>
> > It turns out I was inadvertently working from an old version of the 13089 V3
> > spec. The correct version is much more complete and closer to the V3
> > requirements. However, the language reference topics are currently provided
> > as separate topics, not part of the proposal XML doc. But they are written.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > E.
> >
> > --
> > Eliot Kimber
> > Senior Solutions Architect, RSI Content Solutions
> > "Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together"
> > Main: 512.554.9368
> > www.rsicms.com
> > www.rsuitecms.com
> > Book: DITA For Practitioners, from XML Press,
> > http://xmlpress.net/publications/dita/practitioners-1/
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> > generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php