Order for lang ref files (Was "Re: [dita] problem with packagingof glossaries")

[Kristen James Eberlein <keberlein@pobox.com>]

Obviously, the files are currently sorted alphabetically. Do you have an alternative that you would favor?

Best,

Kris

Michael Priestley wrote:

OF8717A807.2E55BDA2-ON85257619.0056A21F-85257619.00571583@ca.ibm.com" type="cite">
Some potential users of the base package:
- people creating tools that work with simple content applications with minimal structure, like unstructured blogs, news feeds, web page components...
- people who would otherwise not read the spec because it's too big, and can now be seduced into reading just the first part, which provides a context that makes the rest less intimidating

Re the organization below - I'm not sure about the order but the split looks right.

Thanks for making this discussion concrete.

Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
Lead IBM DITA Architect
mpriestl@ca.ibm.com
http://dita.xml.org/blog/25

Kristen James Eberlein <keberlein@pobox.com>

08/21/2009 10:33 AM

To	DITA TC <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	Re: [dita] problem with packaging of glossaries

Two key issues:
1.        Who do we anticipate being the potential users of the base package?
2.        Michael, I want you to look at the current contents of the language reference material for both the base and technical content version. Is this as you have been envisioning it?


Best,

Kris