RE: [dita] How much flexibility do specializers have to make exceptions to behaviors that are outlined in the DITA standard?

["Ogden, Jeff" <jogden@ptc.com>]

Thanks Don. Sorry I missed the note from Deborah.

And Alan Houser just posted a note to the TC list in which he said it
was important.

That makes 3 responses. None saying that the issue is unimportant.

   -Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Day [mailto:dond@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 10:12 AM
> To: Ogden, Jeff
> Subject: RE: [dita] How much flexibility do specializers have to make
> exceptions to behaviors that are outlined in the DITA standard?
> 
> Deborah Pickett did weigh in, Jeff. Although it was not as strongly
> asserted as Eliot's note, I read it as a "somewhat important" reply.
> 
> Regards,
> --
> Don Day
> Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
> Chair, IBM DITA Architects Board
> Email: dond@us.ibm.com
> 11501 Burnet Rd. MS9033E015, Austin TX 78758
> Phone: +1 512-244-2868 (home office)
> 
> "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
>  Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"
>    --T.S. Eliot
> 
> 
> 
>              "Ogden, Jeff"
>              <jogden@ptc.com>
>
To
>              01/15/2008 08:49          <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
>              AM
cc
> 
>
Subject
>                                        RE: [dita] How much flexibility
do
>                                        specializers have to make
>                                        exceptions to behaviors that
are
>                                        outlined in the DITA standard?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I promised to send out a summary of the responses that were received
on
> the question about what is or isn't required by the DITA Standard and
if
> this issue is important enough to continue to spend time on it or not.
> 
> There was only one response. It was from Eliot Kimber, is included
> below, and was sent to the entire TC list.  Eliot is one of the three
or
> four people who has been active in this discussion all along. He
clearly
> thinks that this is important enough to continue to spend time on.
> 
> Not sure what conclusions we can draw from a single response.  One
> possible conclusion is that continuing the discussion wins by a score
of
> one to nothing.
> 
>     -Jeff
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eliot Kimber [mailto:ekimber@reallysi.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 7:01 PM
> > To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Cc: Ogden, Jeff
> > Subject: Re: [dita] How much flexibility do specializers have to
make
> > exceptions to behaviors that are outlined in the DITA standard?
> >
> > Ogden, Jeff wrote:
> > > This is a note that Don Day asked me to send out during
yesterday's
> DITA
> > > TC call.
> > >
> > > About a week ago I restarted the discussion about what the DITA
> Standard
> > > REQUIRES, strongly RECOMMENDS, and what is OPTIONAL.  So far the
> > > restarted discussion has been between just me, Michael, and Eliot.
> What
> > > I'd like to find out from others on the TC is if these issues are
> > > important enough to continue to spend time on them or not?
> > >
> > > So please let me know by sending a short reply either to me or to
> the
> > > DITA TC list.  I'll summarize the responses before next Tuesday's
> DITA
> > > TC call.
> >
> > I think this is very important.
> >
> > The DITA specification needs a conformance statement, which it
> currently
> > does not have.
> >
> > Without a conformance statement we don't really have a standard
> because
> > there's no formal basis on which to judge any given use or
> > implementation of DITA for correctness against the dictates of the
> > specification, in particular, in terms of what things are optional
and
> > what are required. The closest there is are some statements in the
> > architecture spec about requirements for specializations, but
nothing
> > that relates to processors.
> >
> > In order to make a conformance statement the spec must be clear
about
> > what is invariant and what is suggested. It currently does not do
that
> > with sufficient clarity (obviously, or we wouldn't be having this
> > discussion).
> >
> > There is also the question of whether there should be different
levels
> > of conformance based on support for different set of optional
features
> > or if all features of DITA are required. For example, we have to
> decide
> > if a processor that does not implement support for non-standard
> > specializations is or is not conforming. Of course, the easy answer
> (and
> > probably the correct answer for DITA 1.1) is that there are no
> optional
> > features.
> >
> > And of course this all ties into the fuzzier question of what it
means
> > to "support DITA" in certain types of tools and whether or not
that's
> > something specification should address normatively or informatively
or
> > remain silent on. For example, it might make sense for the TC to
issue
> a
> > separate technical report on support for DITA in content management
> > systems that offers guidance by defining some testable categories of
> > support without trying to define formal conformance levels or
> anything.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Eliot
> > --
> > Eliot Kimber
> > Senior Solutions Architect
> > "Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together"
> > Main: 610.631.6770
> > www.reallysi.com
> > www.rsuitecms.com
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in
> OASIS
> at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
> 
>