Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 27 Aug 2013 uploaded

[Nancy Harrison<nharrison@infobridge-solutions.com>]

        Submitter's message
        ACTION ITEM: the 'data' element will be added to 'resourceid' as a bug fix.


Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 27 August 2013
Recorded by N. Harrison

regrets:   Thilo Buchholz, David Helfinstine


Standing Business
=================
Minutes from last meeting: 
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201308/msg00100.html (20 August, Nancy Harrison)  
Proposed by Don, seconded by Dick, approved by TC


Subcommittee Reports:
	DITA Adoption TC Sept 3
	confirmed by Joann

Announcements:
	none


Business
========
1. DITA 1.3 progress
   Progress: Aug 4-25 https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201308/msg00106.html (Eberlein, 26 Aug)
   Update on current deadlines: http://chris.nitchie.com/trellotrack/#511a73d76ee890a51c0007ed
   Trello Board: https://trello.com/b/gPKH0OcFPriority for Aug is to finish stage 2 proposals
Kris; proposals are now down to 39, 3 items went from stage 2-> stage 3 last week; once stage 2 is done she'll start 'nagging' on stage 3.


2. DITA 1.3 proposals, stage 2: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DITA_1.3_Proposals-stage2

Ready for vote: 

Proposal 13097: New troubleshooting topic
      https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201308/msg00042.html (DITA)
      https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201308/msg00041.html (HTML)
      https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201308/msg00040.html (PDF)
      https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201308/msg00039.html (DITA-OT plug-in) 
Moved by Don, 2nded by Kris, approved by TC as follows:

Yes votes:		Anderson, Boses, Day, Doherty, Eberlein, Hackos, Hamilton, Harrison, Kimber, Magliery, Nitchie, Priestley, Warman
no objection	Bissantz, Myers

Ready for discussion:

Proposal 13060: Context Sensitive Help (Help SC)
	 https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201308/msg00107.html (HTML)
	 https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201308/msg00108.html (DITA)
Stan; This proposal has changed significantly since the last discussion, from adding a unique new element specializing off resourceid, to adding new attributes to resourceid (which are in addition to the new @appid mandated by #13008). These new attributes will be able to use conref'd data. These are functionally identical to the new attributes for new @contextid.
- Eliot; are we happy with having extra attributes rather than having subelements?
- Stan; When we're asked about help at help conferences, we've heard that the standard help systems all have a set of qualifiers, this proposal is the union of the qualifiers that anybody might need.
- Eliot; but if I wanted something else, what would I have to do?
- MichaelP; isn't data available inside resourceid?
- Eliot; if so, that would work 
- ChrisN; resourceid doesn't allow data right now
- Eliot; I'd suggest that it should
- Kris; is there a reason why data isn't in resourceid?
- Robert; I think it's an oversight
- Kris; it would be an easy bug fix to add it in.
- Don; Eliot, if we added data into resourceid, would you have any further objection?
- Eliot; no, but I have the concern that people won't understand the difference between an element and an @ specialization.
- Kris; while we're doing this, let's include adding data to resourceid; we can include it in the minutes as an included part of this proposal, and then we won't have to update the official proposal materials.
ActionItem; add data to resourceid as bug fix
Resolution; vote on this next week

Proposal 13102: release management (TechComm TC)
    https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201308/msg00074.html (HTML)
    https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201308/msg00075.html (DITA)
    https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201308/msg00076.html (PDF)
Tom Cihak led the discussion, in particular wrt recent changes based on previous TC discussion. He noted that Eliot had helped with data model date/time elements were moved and replaced with simple string, with the organization and personal name elements borrowed from XNAL,  One of the TC's questions was addressed by Eliot's proposal to change the content model for data.  
[Discussion on the 'heavyweight' nature of the XNAL element set - there are dozens of them, which all get pulled in when pulling in the organization and name elements.]
- Kris; what package will this be part of? It seems to be belong in base, but if it's using XNAL, that would infer it would be in the TechComm plugin, where XNAL is.
- Eliot; Good question, I'm not sure why XNAL is in TechComm isn't in base.  That type of content certainly isn't specific to TechComm.  I was considering adding to the basic.ph content model to include basic block.
- Kris; has Amber seen this? She's working with a lot of medical device companies, and they're the ones who needed this the most.
- Joann; She's seen it, but wasn't asked to review it.
- Kris; I have concerns about the lack of review; this proposal has come out very late.
- Don; what about one more week for review?
- Kris; Does anyone know of other relevant folks we could ask to review?
- Robert; I haven't looked at the proposal; it didn't appear on the TC agenda till the last minute before today's meeting.
- Scott; I could use an extra week to review it.
- Robert; my issue is the XNAL domain; adding it is a problem; it has 25-26 elements that no one wants. just to get person and organization.
- Eliot; another possibility is to define new elements, e.g. 'change0item-person', 'change0item-org'
- Don; what I'm hearing is to leave this in the TechComm package, since that package already includes XNAL, plus we need another week for review.
- Kris; I'll reach out to Amber.  And as far as how much XNAL would be surfaced, could we use constraints to affect that?
- Eliot; yes, it can be constrained so it only appears in the change-item markup.
Resolution; review period was extended, and Kris will solicit Amber's thoughts on the proposal as well.


3. DITA 1.3 proposals, stage 3: https://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DITA_1.3_Proposals-stage3

Stage 3 review process: Responsibilities of proposal owner and reviewers
     https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201306/msg00126.html (Eberlein, 25 June) 

Reviewers needed
Proposal 13119: has reviewers
Proposal 13103: has reviewers
Proposal 13104: allow keyref on object ??
Proposal 13105: has reviewers

Ready for discussion

The following need to be queued for discussion.
13116:

in