Meeting minutes for 27 October 2009

["Gershon Joseph (gerjosep)" <gerjosep@cisco.com>]

 

 

Gershon Joseph Technical Leader, Engineering Product Development Services gerjosep@cisco.com Phone: +972 9 892-7157 Mobile: +972 57 314-1170	Cisco Systems, Inc. Israel Cisco home page

Think before you print.

This e-mail may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message.

Cisco Systems Limited (Company Number: 02558939), is registered in England and Wales with its registered office at 1 Callaghan Square, Cardiff, South Glamorgan CF10 5BT

 

DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes
========================================


The DITA Technical Committee met on 27 October 2009 at 08:00am PT for 60 
minutes.

Chaired by Don Day <dond@us.ibm.com>
Minutes recorded by Gershon Joseph <gerjosep@cisco.com>


Roll call
> Quorum was achieved.


Approve minutes from previous business meetings: 
* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00116.html (20 October 2009, Frankland)
> Minutes approved by acclamation.


Subcommittee/liaison reports (as needed)

* OASIS DITA for Enterprise Business Documents Subcommittee
  > Michael Bose updated the TC: 
  > Posting today for TC review a white paper proposing abstract versions of the
  > base DITA topic types. 
  > The idea is to discuss the proposal for possible adoption in future DITA 
  > releases (likely 1.3)


ITEM: 1.2 Issue: Glossary Group Topic Type Not Included in ditabase 
* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200909/msg00238.html (Kimber) 
* Resume with Eliot present 

> Eliot: The issue is the glossgroup element type is not included in the 
> ditabase shell. On email, nobody disagreed that this was an oversight.

> DECISION: Add glossary group to the existing ditabase shell. 
> [Jeff moved. Eliot seconded. No objections.]


ITEM: Audience of Arch Spec 
* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00002.html (Hackos)

> JoAnn noted that the spec's audience includes less technical users. Some 
> parts of the current spec are written more towards this audience than others.

> Gershon mentioned that some topics can't easily be made accessible to these 
> non-technical audiences and suggested the Adoption TC works on text books to 
> address this gap.

> Kris: We can't have the spec be for all audiences. Also, we've now integrated 
> content from lang and arch spec plus various SCs, and each has its own writing
> style. I suggest we handle this in 1.3 to try to hide the fact the spec is 
> being written by multiple contributors. We would need to do much more editing
> than we've done in the past.

> Don suggested the audience definition should be a concern for the 1.3 
> editorial effort. At most for 1.2 take a look at the "intended audience" 
> topic.

> Jeff: We need to flag, while reviewing, topics that we could write better -- 
> any topic that's difficult to read in its current state should be questioned 
> to ask whether that's really necessary and we should address these in the 1.2 
> scope.

> Dick offered to review these topics and provide feedback about "problematic" 
> topics.

> Need to review the new terminology topic and determine what we want to push 
> forward into the wider spec, and what we want to remove or write around at 
> this time.

> Kris mentioned there are review comments that contain conflicting ideas about 
> vocabulary.

> Don suggested a meeting of interested folks to work up a proposal to bring 
> back to the TC.

> ACTION: Kris to set up the meeting and drive this forward.
> ACTION: Add this item to the review tracking items and close this item.
> CLOSED (rolled up into spec review)


New ITEM 13 Oct: documentation of conref restrictions 
* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00050.html (Nevin) 

> Don suggested passing this on to the editors.

> Jeff: The conref inclusion section should include a comprehensive discussion 
> of this. Doing this is a good idea.

> Bruce agrees the content inclusion topic may be a good place to bring all 
> these issues together.

> Don: Someone needs to read all of the topics Bruce mentioned and figure out 
> how best to move the information into a central location, cleaning up the 
> other topics as they go along.

> ACTION: Bruce and JoAnn to harvest the conref constraints and do the research,
> compile what they can and bring it back to the TC.


New ITEM 13 Oct: Element-by-element recommendations for translators 
* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00065.html (Hackos) 

> Mark this as a comment rather than an issue. 
> JoAnn asked Robert where in the lang ref this should go. 
> Move to end of agenda items list next week.


*** Meeting Adjourned ***