[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Fwd: DITA 1.3 troubleshooting topic: missing a good place for diagnostic steps...
Forwarding on an e-mail from a colleague at Ericcson ... Best,
Kris Kristen James Eberlein Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting www.eberleinconsulting.com +1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype) -------- Forwarded Message --------
Hi Kris, When we met at DITA
Europe in Munich, back in November, I mentioned that I might
be sending one or the other question or comment on the DITA
spec. Well, as always, I never
really came round to doing that... -- but in recent
discussions about how we could implement the new
troubleshooting topic for our content we came across an
issue that I would like to bring up with you: If we need to document
troubleshooting steps for a rather complex scenario, in
which diagnostic steps are required to identify what the
actual 'condition' in question is at all, we are missing a
specific element for storing these diagnostic steps... For the diagnostic
steps, we would like to create a flowchart (with
hyperlinks/hotspots or whatever you might call them) and to
have a linear sequence of steps to go with that, as
suggested in the White paper on Troubleshooting as well. Funnily, that White
paper is not quite consistent regarding where to put that
kind of information either: -- The sample
troubleshooting topic has this kind of information in the
first <troubleSolution> element
-- The sample topic
template at the end (that is provided as a codeblock for
copy-and-paste) includes instructions that the diagnostic
steps should go into the <condition> element... We have looked at both
options more closely - and I must say that we are not happy
with any of the two: -- If we use
<condition> for the diagnostic steps (and maybe also a
flowchart with hotspots), we would have to create a
'pseudo-steplist' for the linear sequence of steps, using an
ordered list (something you actually should never do! -- and
if we start doing that in our 'official' templates, writers
might start to do similar things in other places as well
...) -- If we use a
<troublesolution> element, we need to include a
description and a flowchart in the <cause>; and put
the steps in the <remedy>. Do you have an idea how
others are dealing with this situation? Can you remember why you
decided not to have a specific element for diagnostic steps? Thanks in advance for
your feedback! All the best for 2017, Silke SILKE ACHTERFELD
Legal entity: Ericsson Telekommunikation GmbH,
registered office in Frankfurt. This Communication is
Confidential. We only send and receive email on the basis of
the terms set out at www.ericsson.com/email_disclaimer
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]