RE: [dita-adoption] Groups - DITA/XLIFF Feature Article uploaded

["Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dita-adoption@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:dita-
> adoption@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of JoAnn Hackos
> Sent: Thursday, 2011 October 06 15:35
> To: dita-adoption@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [dita-adoption] Groups - DITA/XLIFF Feature Article uploaded
> 
> Submitter's message
> This version includes the revision of the content on the catalog issue
> based on input from Don Day and Rodolfo Raya. It does not yet include
> the changes to one of the examples that I'm waiting for. Please review
> before Monday's meeting.

I've already posted my comments at 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201110/msg00001.html 
in response to an earlier email from JoAnn sent to the DITA TC,
but here they are for the DITA Adoption TC.

----

I'm about to let almost any wording go on this at this point if 
the rest of the TC thinks it makes sense, but I have to point 
out that the wording in the latest draft makes no sense.  
"Validate…using...OASIS XML Catalogs…?"  Catalogs validate?  
And I still don't see what's so important about catalogs that we
are calling them out here when there is so much more to validation.

So the text suggested in the latest draft just seems ill-chosen on 
several levels to me, but at this point I'm about to assume that I'm 
the odd one out, and as long as the wording doesn't imply that a tool 
is unacceptable if it doesn't use OASIS XML Catalogs (even if it instead 
uses OASIS' own 18 year old TR9401 Catalog standard), then I'm not going 
to stand in the way any more.

paul