RE: [dita] Groups - DITATCMeeting_10062009.txt uploaded

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

The draft minutes from last week's DITA TC meeting included the following item:

 

5. Item-2: 1.2 Issue: Glossary Group Topic Type Not Included in ditabase

   - Jeff Ogden has distributed an email that summarized many of the

     email threads on this topic. There had been some online and some

     offline discussions about Jeff's email. Jeff did not believe that

     all the issues that he had raised in his summary had actually

     been addressed in the subsequent discussions.

   - ACTION: Jeff agreed to separate out the unresolved issues in his

     email so they could be reviewed and discussed discretely at

     the next TC meeting.

 

My comments and the action item in the minutes above probably belongs on “3. Business-Item-1: Resumption of: task vs. general task, constraints, conref, and other related issues.”  I sent out a summary for this item before last week’s meeting and as last week’s draft minutes state “Further discussion deferred to next week to allow folks not in attendance this week to participate.” I’ll update the summary and sent it out again before the next TC meeting. 

 

The Glossary Group item was originally raised by Eliot and I haven’t sent anything out about it.

 

What I remember from last week’s meeting on the “Glossary Group” question goes something like this:

 

Eliot wasn’t on the call.  Don thought we should defer the discussion until Eliot was present. Jeff asked Robert if Glossary Group had been inadvertently left out of ditabase and this could be considered a bug fix issue and be simply fixed by adding Glossary Group to ditabase.  Robert said that he thought the question was more a philosophical one and that the TC needed to decide if it wants to include Glossary Group in the Technical Content ditabase or not.  And with that the discussion was deferred to next week.

 

Glossary Group (glossgroup) wasn’t part of DITA 1.1. It is currently described in the “Glossary related elements” section within the “Glossary elements” section within the “Technical Contents” section of the draft DITA 1.2 Language Reference. I don’t see any mention of Glossary Group in the Architecture portions of the spec. although it is always possible that I missed it.  I don’t see any harm in adding Glossary Group to the Technical Content ditabase and so think we should add it.

   -Jeff

 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: stan@modularwriting.com [mailto:stan@modularwriting.com]

> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 6:58 PM

> To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org

> Subject: [dita] Groups - DITATCMeeting_10062009.txt uploaded

>

> The document named DITATCMeeting_10062009.txt has been submitted by Dr.

> Stanley Doherty to the OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture

> (DITA)

> TC document repository.

>

> Document Description:

> TC Meeting Minutes for October 06, 2009

>

> View Document Details:

> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=34560

>

> Download Document:

> http://www.oasis-

> open.org/committees/download.php/34560/DITATCMeeting_10062009.txt

>

>

> PLEASE NOTE:  If the above links do not work for you, your email

> application

> may be breaking the link into two pieces.  You may be able to copy and

> paste

> the entire link address into the address field of your web browser.

>

> -OASIS Open Administration