Fwd: FW: [dita] Release Management Domain: Must apply to maps as well as

Hi Kris and Don,

I ‘replied all’ to JoAnn’s email but got a message that it was rejected by the dita list.

with best regards

Tom Cihak

Digital Networking Information Development

Freescale

512.895.3063

From: Cihak Thomas-R65612
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 12:19 PM
To: 'JoAnn Hackos'; Hudson, Scott
Cc: Eliot Kimber; dita
Subject: RE: [dita] Release Management Domain: Must apply to maps as well as topics

The wording ‘at the topic level’ was in no way intended to limit the use of the domain to topics; it was merely to emphasize that the release notes were to be recorded in the same file where the changes were made (rather than in a spreadsheet or separate topic or file).

If we change the wording to this:

“…enables content workers to log comments and metadata at the topic or map level….”

Is this sufficient?

btw, here’s the text of one of Eliot’s emails to me when he helped me with the domain integration:

The domain as I specified it can be used with both maps and topics because change-historylist is specialized from <metadata>, which is allowed only in <prolog> and <topicmeta>.

Cheers,

Thank you.

with best regards

Tom Cihak

Digital Networking Information Development

Freescale

512.895.3063

From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:dita@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of JoAnn Hackos
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 11:16 AM
To: Hudson, Scott
Cc: Eliot Kimber; dita
Subject: Re: [dita] Release Management Domain: Must apply to maps as well as topics

We need to hear from Tom Cihak.

Sent from my iPad

JoAnn Hackos

Comtech Services Inc

710 Kipling Street Suite 400

Lakewood CO 80215

Comtech
Logo 2005 small

CIDM will be hosting the Content Management Strategies/DITA North America conference in April 2013.

On Mar 8, 2014, at 9:14 PM, "Hudson, Scott" <Scott.Hudson@schneider-electric.com> wrote:

Sounds reasonable to me.

--Scott

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 8, 2014, at 2:55 PM, "Eliot Kimber" <ekimber@contrext.com> wrote:

Proposal 13102 as written says:

"enables content workers to log comments and metadata at the topic level
when changes are made."

The implicit restriction to topics is not necessary: there's no reason not
to allow revision history within maps and no technical reason to not use
it within maps (that is, <metadata>, the specialization base of
<change-historylist>, is allowed within <topicmeta>, so the domain is
inherently allowable within maps).

I take this to be a simple oversight on the part of the original proposers
who were focused on topic-specific use cases. I can't see any reason not
to allow the domain within maps and can think of times when I would want
to use it in maps.

Does the TC object to adjusting the spec language to explicitly allow use
of the domain within maps (which also implies integrating the domain in
all non-base map types in addition to the non-base topic types already
indicated in the proposal).

Cheers,

Eliot

—————
Eliot Kimber, Owner
Contrext, LLC
http://contrext.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
______________________________________________________________________

dita message