OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

dita message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes - 3 November 2009


Gershon Joseph
Technical Leader, Engineering
Product Development Services

Phone: +972 9 892-7157
Mobile: +972 57 314-1170

Cisco Systems, Inc.

Cisco home page

Think before you print. 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


GIF image

GIF image

DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes

The DITA Technical Committee met on 3 November 2009 at 08:00am PT for 60 

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/msg00145.html (27 October 2009, Joseph)
> Minutes approved by acclamation.

Subcommittee/liaison reports (as needed)

* OASIS DITA Help Subcommittee
> Stan will report next week.

* OASIS DITA Pharmaceutical Content Subcommittee
> ACTION: Don to send Steffen a note asking for an update in 2 week's time.


1. BusDocs Whitepaper: 
   * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00134.html 

2. Article about conref push published by Adoption TC: 
   * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00137.html 


ITEM: DITA 1.2 specification (revised by Eberlein 3 November 2009) 
* Spreadsheet and DITA topics located in the Subversion repository 
* Information about contributors, deadlines, editorial guidelines, Subversion 
  clients, and more 

* Business: 

  a. Progress report on spec review #2 
     * All reviews are completed except for the following: 
       * Technical content (arch spec): Day 
       > Kris asked if anyone would like to volunteer to replace Don on this
       > review task. Jeff Ogden and Dick Hamilton offered to review this
       > content.

       * L & T (both arch spec and lang ref): L & T subcommittee (expected 
       > completion 10/13), Nevin 80%
       > L&T SC has completed their review.

  b. Need to revise spec author/review schedule due to the following issues: 
     * Constraints proposals and issues 
     * Discussion around terminology 
     * Work being done to restructure conref/keyref/href material 
     > Kris is going to contact authors offline for revised completion 
     > estimates in order to arrive at a realistic revised schedule.

  c. Need for authors to handle the following points (we might need to 
     schedule an authors meeting) 
     * Implementing "referencing element" and "referenced element" terminology
     * Implementing cascade vs. inherit terminology 
     * Moving content of some <draft-comment> elements -> XML comments; for 
       the next review, we should be using <draft-comment> elements only for 
       comments to reviewers. 
     * Ensuring conformance statements are valid, correct and correctly marked 
       up ("must", "should" etc. correctly used and tagged) 
     > Kris will drive this on the list. May need a meeting to discuss.

ITEM: documentation of conref restrictions 
* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00050.html (Nevin) 
* Nevin update: 
  * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200911/msg00011.html 

> Bruce summarized the changes in email. 
> Gershon reviewed the topic and found it good (minor editorial changes sent 
> via private email).

> Kris: Eliot, Robert and I had an offline email thread where Eliot 
> volunteered to review Bruce's topic and the relevant existing topics in the 
> spec and come up with a recommendation.

> ACTION: Eliot to review the topic and propose how to move forward with this. 
> CONTINUED -- Revisit next week.

New ITEM 13 Oct: strong/weak constraint proposal 
* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00051.html (Priestley) 
> Closed 2 weeks ago; remove from today's agenda.

New ITEM: 20 Oct: Proposal to the OASIS DITA TC to form a "DITA for the Web" Sub-Committee 
* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00102.html (Hunt) 

> John Hunt walked through the proposal.
> The TC discussed whether this SC would be better off as an SC of the Adoption
> TC. The statement of purpose is more adoption oriented, while the list of 
> deliverables is more spec oriented.
> Don suggested perhaps the SC could cover the technical issues first as a SC 
> of this TC and then take the adoption/white paper activities over to the 
> adoption TC.
> Seth feels they should start off in the DITA TC. Kris agreed. No-one objected
> to this.
> John moved to form the SC. Bruce seconded. No objections.

> DECISION: The DITA TC agreed to form a "DITA for the Web" SC.

New ITEM: Domain Integrator 
* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00129.html (Kimber) 

> Eliot clarified that he was following up on the general action from a meeting
> several weeks ago for folks to test-drive the tool. Eliot found that the tool
> comes close to meeting the needs of providing a shell creating tool. Positive
> assessment from Eliot. 
> Don reminded the TC members to test-drive the tool.
> Eliot noted that the tool only supports creating a shell from the standard 
> modules. There is no support for supporting specialized modules.
> Don asked Eliot to engage the developer via email. We're not sure whether the
> developer monitors the online bug reporting tool.

> ACTION: DITA Adoption TC to add the tool to their list of DITA supporting 
> tools and write a white paper to help users generate custom shells. Gershon 
> to forward this request to the Adoption TC.

ITEM: Resumption of: task vs. general task, constraints, conref, and other related issues 
* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200909/msg00368.html (Ogden summary)
* wiki summary: Summary of task vs. general task, constraints, conref, and 
  other related issues 
  * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00087.html (Ogden, and 
    following thread) 
* Despite the title of this item, this discussion now only concerns restored 
  items 3 and 4 
* Continue discussion from last week (Ogden, Michael, Eliot, and Seth Park's 
  * Re-create general task from topic? 
    * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200910/msg00117.html (Park) 

> Jeff: Discussion is wrapped up except for existing task specializations if 
> somebody upgrades from 1.1 to 1.2 they will end up with general tasks unless 
> the specializer takes some action. Is this OK or not? I see 3 alternatives on
> the table to address this:
> 1) Abandon constraints as a method to implement generic task, and go back and
> respecialize task from topic and so forth. 
> 2) Violate some of our design pattern rules to try to prevent side-effects 
> that would repair the problem at least for this 1.2 release of the spec. 
> 3) Stick with current course come what may and specializers will have to make
> changes if they don't want the general task behavior.
> Michael and I had a conversation 2 weeks ago about whether there are some 
> alternatives that allow us to repair the problem. I'm OK violating the rules 
> a bit, but Michael was still reluctant but open to the idea to solve the 
> problem. Since then the discussion has been around the details of how to 
> actually do that.

> Michael: The concern I had about automation of the specialization assembly 
> based on file naming conventions is less of a concern. We don't have a strict
> naming convention for domains. I'm still really unsure. If we do this now, 
> will we be able to address it easily in a future release or are we making the
> issue bigger in the longer term?

> Gershon suggested preference for the 3rd option [in Jeff's list] and handle 
> the issue via documentation including having the Adoption TC help us to be 
> proactive about letting the community know that specializations will break.

> CONTINUED. Continue on list. Don to move this item to end of agenda next week.

*** Meeting Adjourned ***

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]