OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

dita message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


(Minutes taken by Seraphim Larsen <seraphim.l.larsen@intel.com>)

DITA Technical Committee website:  
    - Public:
    - Members only: http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/

- Roll call => We have quorum today!

- Review/approve minutes from previous meetings:
    - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200511/msg00004.html
(Nov 1)
        - Don Day moves to accept the minutes as read, Sharon Veach
          seconds, no objections, APPROVED BY ACCLAMATION.
    - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200511/msg00053.html
(Nov 8)
        - Don Day moves to accept the minutes as read, Sharon Veach
          seconds, no objections, APPROVED BY ACCLAMATION.

- New issues:
    - Spec comment tracking options
        - beta bugzilla mechanism
        - ws-rx TC tracking log method
        - OASIS Wiki for TCs ("All TC Wikis are open to the world;
          posting is only allowed by TC members. So the Wiki would
          allow someone on the TC to enter the issue and post
          progress/resolution for the world to see but the outside
          world wouldn't be able to actually log the issue.")
        - *** Need to select and follow a method for 1.1:
            - Bruce -- Is there someone who can edit the comments
              and put them into place?  If yes, the Wiki would be
              a wonderful thing.  It would have a natural
              organization to thing.  
                - A comment would point to the spec, or the spec
                  would point to the comment.  But it seems like
                  there is already a place where the comments are
                  collected, but 
            - Erik -- One idea is to maintain the next version of
              the spec as a Wiki document, and allow people to
              comment on it.  But we need to make it clear that this
              "version" of the spec would not be authoritative.
            - Don -- The main issue is that we need to agree on the
              overall method.  Any more pros/cons?
            - Michael Priestly -- What do we do with comments after
              they are incorporated?
            - Erik -- We can use the Wiki history mechanism to track
              this kind of thing.  The Wikipedia has a good model
              that we can copy.  It seems like that would be very
            - Robin -- The Wiki that would be offered doesn't have 
              as much support as some of the
              others, but it does track up to 15 versions.  But
              there's no round-trip between the Wiki format and
              standard HTML.  Thus you have to reconcile yourself to
              a copy-and-paste process (or write your own Perl
              scripts).  Thus:  Investigate it, but beware of the
            - Don -- PROPOSAL:  We will go with the Wiki approach,
              and Seraphim will take on the administrative task of
              adding comments to the Wiki.  We will make it clear
              that the draft in the Wiki is not the authoritative
              draft of the 1.1 spec, but is an unofficial draft in
              progress.  ACTION for Seraphim would be to investigate
              this, and contact Robin Cover to get help with other
              Wikis and other guidance.
                - Don Day moves to accept this proposal, Bruce Esrig
                  seconds, no objections, APPROVED BY ACCLAMATION.

    - Revised section nesting and new keyword nesting proposals
      added (see below)
        - Don -- We mainly need to decide whether to allow this in,
          since we're at the deadline.
        - Michael Priestley -- Let's make an exception for this
          item, rather than extending the deadline.
        - PROPOSAL -- Grant an extension to Paul Prescod to have
          till next week to put this proposal in the proper
            - Don moves, Michael seconds, no objections, APPROVED BY

    - PROPOSAL -- Give Michael Priestley and Robert Anderson an
      extension till next week to provide the proposal on "keyword
      nesting" in the proper template.
        - Don moves, Yas Etessam seconds, no objections, APPROVED BY

    - 1.1 schedule proposed (completion of approval by Sept 2006)
        - PROPOSAL:  
            - Six meetings on design by end of February. (Note: W3C
              uses "candidate recommendation" upon completion of
              design. The end of February would be a time when
              vendors could begin to implement, test, and offer
            - Two rounds of draft writing to integrate design and
              perform updates.
            - Target submission of draft specification for public
              review at beginning of June 2006.
            - Expect completion of approval process by September

        - Don moves to accept this schedule proposal, Michael
          Priestley seconds, no objections, APPROVED BY ACCLAMATION.

    - Staging of DTD updates -- Decide whether to approve as
      a Committee Draft or as a non-normative errata
        - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200511/msg00069.html

        - PROPOSAL:  To approve as a committee draft (revision
          1.0.1) the upload of the revised DTDs and schemas with
          release notes, conforming to the latest changes that
          Robert Anderson has proposed.
            - Don moves to accept this proposal, Bruce Esrig
              seconds, no objections, APPROVED BY ACCLAMATION.

    - New template for 1.1 (review ideas still out)
        - Not covered
    - Clarification of chunk attribute (see below)
        - Not covered
    - FYI -- Spec final formats reposted
        - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200511/msg00061.html
        - Now includes DITA source.  This is the formal DITA 1.0 spec.
        - The only real difference is the presence of the OASIS
          copyright language.

- Issues tracking:
    - Features list
    - Definition of Status Phases:
        - In Progress:  Author(s) still working on proposal
        - Submitted:  Proposal has been submitted to TC for
          consideration; needs TC decision (vote) in order to
        - Proposal Approved:  TC has approved the proposal; authors
          working to complete the design
        - Design Approved:  Final design of the proposal has been
        - Postponed:  Proposal has been postponed to post-1.1.

- Design Approved:
    - # 9 New DATA element
    - #12 Make universal attributes completely universal

- Proposal Approved:
    - #20 Extensible metadata attributes
    - #11 Create elements for text attributes with translatable text
    - #40 Keyref architecture
    - #23 Embed version numbers into catalogs
    - #45 Add See, See Also indexing elements
    - #45a Add sort order indexing elements
    - #45b Add page range indexing elements
    - #34: Constraints - restriction without specialization

- Submitted:
        - Don -- Note that even if we haven't approved these items,
          please go ahead and work on your design versions of these
        - Michael -- Have all these items been submitted as
          documented proposals?
        - Don -- Yes.
        - Don -- Can we approve all the numbered proposals without
            - Michael -- Confused by that idea.  
            - Don -- We are taking time to formally review each of
              these proposals.  Can we just submit them all, and
              approve that each of them moves into the design phase?
            - Michael -- Concerned about that, because we need to
              give direction to the design.  Better to review
              earlier than later.

    - #38: Bookmap / bkinfo revision
        - Don -- Highest-rated item on our list.  We need to make
          a decision here so we can move on -- there's a lot of work
          to do here.
        - Don -- Are we headed in the right direction?
        - Michael -- Are we replicated metadata that already has
          a home somewhere else?
        - Don -- If it's part of the *book* metadata, then it has
          value, so that people harvesting the metadata don't have
          to look for it in two places.
        - Michael -- bookmeta is a specialization of topicmeta,
        - Don -- Yes.
        - Michael -- Do we now have a publisher metadata element?
        - No time to continue discussion
        - ACTION for Don, Michael, Erik Hennum -- Continue the
          discussion on the list.

    - #32: Domain and topic integration
    - #8: Allow tm to contain images or logo content
    - #5 Add ANSI warning labels as addition to element
    - #19 Introduce new, more general task type
    - # 4 Use subset of OASIS xNAL standard for addresses
    - # 6 Make @role (and other enumerated attribues) unenumerated
    - #17a Conref - improved specialization support
    - #17b Conref - with delta (applying changes)
    - #17c Conref - referencing a range of elements
    - #17d Conref and conditional processing - preserve without
    - #17e Conref - push instead of pull
    - #42 shortdesc flexibility (includes #41)
    - #43 Semantic (implicit) linking
    - #35 Support foreign content vocabularies such as MathML and SVG
    - #14 Specialize glossary entry and definition elements

- In progress:
    - #47 Structured Sections (replaced by "Nested sections proposed
    - keyword nesting

- Postponed to Post 1.1:
    - #37 Reconciling topic and elements

- Post 1.1: everything else

- Spec and process issues (from Yas's notes, other comments):
    - Update DITA 1.0 DTD/Schema specification (bug fixes and
      comment edits)
    - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200507/msg00058.html
      among others

- Naming convention
    - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200509/msg00024.html
      (approved 2005-09-30)

- OASIS artifact naming guidelines (to follow where applicable)
    - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200507/maillist.html

- Relax the related links content model so it can be empty (more of
  a fix issue)
    - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200509/msg00050.html
      (approved for 1.1 timing)

- Documenting DITA design principles (not approved yet)
    - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200510/msg00005.html

- Details in the DITA spec--Priestley ("There are some cases...
  where the spec needs to be updated")
    - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200510/msg00059.html
    - behavior of conref with attributes on the referencing element
    - why a content fragment has to be addressed within a topic

- Styling options for conditional text
    - Recognizing DITA documents

- New worked proposals (unnumbered) from members:
    - Extensibility of DITA through new attributes
        - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200508/msg00065.html
        - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200508/msg00069.html
          and following

    - Styling Options for Conditional Text
        - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200508/msg00066.html
          and following
        - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200509/msg00025.html

    - Recognizing DITA Documents
        - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200508/msg00067.html
          and following

    - Start of documenting DITA design principles (Paul Prescod)
        - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200510/msg00005.html

    - Module Registry proposal (Bruce Esrig)
        - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200510/msg00097.html

    - Clarification of Chunk attribute (Erik Hennum)
        - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200511/msg00070.html

- Announcements/Opens
    - Don -- Skip next week?
        - Several people will not be available
        - Thus we will cancel next week's meeting (11/22).

Seraphim Larsen                       CIG Operations / TPPE
Senior Technical Writer                   Intel Corporation
(480) 552-6504                                 Chandler, AZ

The content of this message is my personal opinion only. 
Although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make 
here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor 
am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]