My thought is "NO". If someone needs to create Learning content for
software, then they can easily create a shell to include it. I don't
think everyone who creates training will need these domains, so should
not be subjected to all of the extra tags if they are included.
Best regards,
--Scott
john_hunt@us.ibm.com wrote:
OFF21E76EE.FDA3FD08-ON85257433.0055F420-85257433.00567A13@lotus.com"
type="cite">
Dear DITA learning and training
specialization
sc -
The DITA TC has been discussing
packaging
plans and options for DITA 1.2. See -
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200804/msg00077.html.
Here's what's proposed for the
"Learning
and Training Content Package" -
4) Learning and Training Content Package
a) DITA 1.2 Learning and Training
Content Architecture and Language Reference.
b) Doctype shells for all of
the Learning and Training topic
specializations
except learningBase, includes the core topic, software,
programming,
UI, Learning topic, and Learning Metadata domains.
c) Learning and Training topic,
map, and metadata domains.
d) Learning and Training map
doctype shell (map plus the map group,
delayed resolution,
Learning Map,
Learning Metadata,
and Learning topic domains).
e) Learning and Training bookmap
doctype shell (bookmap plus the
map group, delayed
resolution, Learning Map and Learning
Metadata domains).
f) Learning and Training
map domain specialization modules.
We have a couple of issues to decide -
I. Should the Learning and Training
topics
and ditabase doctype shells include the software, ui, and programming
domains?
II. Do
we want a Learning and Training map doctype shell that is based on
bookmap?
John said yes.
Please respond with your thoughts about
whether
to include the domains in the L&T topic shells.
Thanks.
John
___________________________________
John Hunt
DITA Architect / Lotus Information Development Center
Chair, OASIS DITA learning and training content sub-committee
IBM Software Group/Lotus Software
john_hunt@us.ibm.com
|