From: Michael Priestley
[mailto:mpriestl@ca.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 12:11 PM
To: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org; 'Ogden, Jeff'; Mary McRae
Subject: RE: [dita] DITA 1.2 specification documents
Hi Mary,
We've provided
separate language and architectural specs in the past with a single overview
doc that links to both - I'm assuming the same approach would continue to work?
Michael
Priestley
Lead IBM DITA Architect
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25
"Mary
McRae" <mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
Sent by: Mary
McRae <marypmcrae@gmail.com>
07/01/2008
12:05 PM
Please respond to
<mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org>
|
|
To
|
"'Ogden,
Jeff'" <jogden@ptc.com>, <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
|
RE:
[dita] DITA 1.2 specification documents
|
|
Hi
Jeff et al,
This list looks great – just remember that you’ll either need to produce a
single document called “DITA 1.2” that will then contain the requisite front
matter and listing of each of the separate components (think intro section to a
multi-volume set); or each of these will become a separately-balloted stand-alone
specification/standard.
Obviously you can combine *some* of the pieces into the main DITA 1.2
document and leave others to stand alone as appropriate as well.
I know I’ve brought it up before, but I just don’t want to see the process
delayed once you’re ready to go to public review J
All
the best,
Mary
From: Ogden, Jeff
[mailto:jogden@ptc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 10:58 AM
To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [dita] DITA 1.2 specification documents
Here is the
list of planned DITA 1.2 specification documents as of the last time we talked
about this.
a) DITA 1.2 Base Architectural
Specification (introduction, topic, map, and metadata markup, processing
including delayed resolution, specialization including constraints).
b) DITA 1.2 Base Language Reference (map,
topic, metadata including delayed resolution, map group domain).
c) DITA 1.2 Utility Domain
Specializations Architecture and Language Reference (utilities, highlighting, and
hazard statement domains).
d) DITA 1.2 xNAL Domain Specializations
Architecture and Language Reference.
e) DITA 1.2 Technical Content
Architecture and Language Reference (concept, task, reference, glossary).
f) DITA 1.2 Software,
Programming, and User Interface Domains Specializations Architecture and
Language Reference.
g) DITA 1.2 Book Architecture and
Language Reference (bookmap).
h) DITA 1.2 Learning and Training Content
Architecture and Language Reference.
i) DITA 1.2 Machine
Industry Architecture and Language Reference.
j) DITA 1.2 Semantic
Linking, Controlled Values, and Taxonomies Architecture and Language Reference.
k) DITA 1.2 Processing Guidelines
and Examples (non-normative).
Item (e) might
or might not be renamed.
Item (f) might
or might not have some doctype shells added.
I would still
like to create item (k), but suspect that we should drop it from the DITA 1.2
work and do it later as a “best practice” or similar document that is
non-normative and outside of the DITA 1.2 Specification.
Given recent
discussions it is possible that we may want to combine some of these items, but
exactly how isn’t clear to me at this point.
-Jeff