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]

Subject: DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 2 January 2007


Gershon L Joseph
Director of Technology and Single Sourcing
Tech-Tav Documentation Ltd.

Secretary, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Secretary, OASIS DITA Translation Subcommittee
Member, OASIS DocBook Technical Committee

office: +972-8-974-1569
mobile: +972-57-314-1170
web:    http://www.tech-tav.com
DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 2 January 2007

(Recorded by Gershon Joseph <gershon@tech-tav.com>)

The DITA Technical Committee met on Tuesday, 2 January 2007 at 08:00am PT
for 60 minutes.

1.  Roll call
    We have quorum.

2.  Accept minutes from previous business meeting:
    http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200612/msg00027.html (12 Dec) 
    http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200612/msg00028.html (correction on PTC position)

    Accepted with correction. [moved by Don, seconded by Rob Frankland, no objections]

3.  Business:

    1.  ITEM: Review schedule for CD vote (initiate the 1.1 review process)
        http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200612/msg00031.html (Michael Priestley)

            Michael suggested formal TC vote to accept the spec next meeting.

            Don: If I get the lang spec out in a couple of days, can we have 
            the vote on the 16th?
            The latest production kit reduces the total page count to about 600 
            pages (based on alphabetical map).

            Michael: The chapter-based document will be smaller, since the 
            alphabetical one starts each element on a new page. I expect it will 
            be under 200 pages.

            Don: I'll contact Chris Wong to find out how to generate the change 
            bars, so the lang spec will include change bars.

            Don: It appears the TC wants to take a week by week decision on 
            when to vote on the spec.

            ACTION: Don to include revisit of this discussion on 16 Jan agenda.

    2.  ITEM: Ongoing review of 1.1 drafts

        * Architectural Spec: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200612/msg00033.html

            Don: Some list feedback on Michael's questions.

            Michael: Should we deprecate the grouped value syntax for conditional 
            property values in otherprops?  List discussion was in favor of deprecating.

            Paul clarifies that this means we'll pull the element out in 2.0, not 1.x.

            Michael moves to deprecate otherprops in favor of adding new attributes. 
            JoAnn seconds. No objections.

            DECISION: Deprecate otherprops with documentation to recommend adding attributes.

            Discussion on whether implementations must support deprecated elements.
            Consensus that they do not have to support deprecated elements.

        * Remaining questions: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200612/msg00034.html

            Michael proposes to remove the following sentence:
            "The rule may be relaxed in future versions of DITA if a mechanism is 
            added for tracking dependencies between structural and domain specializations 
            in use by a document type."
            DECISION: To be removed. No objections.

            Michael proposes to remove the reference to architectural forms from 
            the class attribute discussion.
            Some TC members pointed out the comparison may not be useful as an 
            explanation of the class attribute. Proposal to rewrite to stand on 
            its own to describe the class attribute. 
            Michael: This is only a wording change. If no objections, I'll make the change.
            Paul: Why not just remove the sentence making the comparison and leave the rest?
            Michael: yes, that works.
            DECISION: Remove the following text:
            "It's something like an  architectural forms attribute, except that 
            it contains multiple mappings  in a single attribute, instead of 
            one mapping per attribute."

            Michael: Should we add catalogs and public identifiers to the arch spec?
            Paul: Catalogs are part of the tool, but not part of the spec. Public 
            IDs should be in the spec, but catalogs don't need to be part of the spec.
            DECISION: Include the public IDs; do not include the catalog.
            No objections.

        * Language Spec: updating from Fix List: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/Fix_list_for_1.1_Language_Spec_draft

        * DTD: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200611/msg00044.html

        * XSD: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200612/msg00029.html

            Don: Has anyone used the 1.1 DTDs yet?
            Gershon: we are integrating DITA 1.1 DTDs into a CMS at this time, 
            and expect to have a fully working product implementation in about 2 weeks.
            Paul: We have included the 1.1 DTDs in the Arbortext Editor that was 
            released recently.
            Chris: We have used them at a client.

            Don: Should we keep a public list of who is testing and using the 1.1 DTDs?

            ACTION: Don to set up a Wiki page for list of implementers. TC members 
            to add details of their projects to the page.

    3.  ITEM: What is a topic? (need to stage the discussion against roadmap)
        * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200612/msg00038.html (Kimber)

            Don: Good discussion on the list. Is anything still open with respect 
            to the 1.1 schedule?
            JoAnn: I reread the arch spec on topic and don't think anything there 
            needs updating. The spec does not reflect some of the issues Eliot 
            brings up. It's mainly an issue of legacy definition, not really an 
            issue of what a topic is.

            Eliot: I agree, but feel we need a crisper definition of what a topic 
            is and an example of when a topic should have just a title.
            The arch spec must be consistent with the lang spec, which is not the 
            current case.

            Michael: Glossary for example is a topic without a body.
            Edge cases, such as legacy docs, ultra-small topics, and leaf nodes
            could be directly addressed in the arch spec...

            Don: The edge cases may be better addressed via Best Practice on 
            migration of legacy content.

            Michael: It's not only migration, it's fitting content that does not 
            easily fit into DITA which is not necessarily migration.

            JoAnn: Michael, could you add a single paragraph to the arch spec rather 
            than a whole new topic?

            Michael: I'll try to draft up something and send to the list.

            Eliot: There is no formal definition of topic, and I feel there should be.

            Michael: We need a technical definition of what a topic is, since it 
            supports more than a pure topic.

            ACTION: Michael to post text to list for comment.


            Don: Gershon, can you get the front cover overrides done in this timeframe?

            Gershon: Yes, I'll put a developer on it.

            Discussion: Will base overrides on DITA-OT 1.3.1.

    4.  ITEM: Translation best practices
        * No new status--meetings will resume Jan 8

        Chris: We published our hazard statement domain on 12 December. We are 
        currently working on a specialization of task for troubleshooting, ETA 
        Easter time.

4.  Announcements/Opens

    JoAnn: I submitted a panel discussion for business case for DITA at the OASIS 
    symposium. Anyone who would like to participate should contact JoAnn.

-- Meeting adjourned at 09:00 --

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