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: RE: [dita] Release date


AFAIK the OASIS procedure states that a spec sent out for public review must be final. Minor updates to language to clarify things is permitted, as are fixes to typos etc. However, any change to the normative spec that is not just cleaning up the language requires the process to be started again. I think it's unfair to submit an incomplete spec to public review, since we would need to resubmit it after we finish our spec development work. It would be unfair on our TC admin, who has to do quite a bit of behind the scenes work in order to release a spec into the approval workflow, and it would also be unfair to the general OASIS members who would review the incomplete spec and then be asked to re-review it a few months later.
 
The TC needs to finish our design and development work and complete the spec documentation before we initiate the OASIS review workflow.
 
--
Gershon
 


From: Grosso, Paul [mailto:pgrosso@ptc.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 5:43 PM
To: dita
Subject: RE: [dita] Release date

I'm not sure if there is an OASIS policy on this or not, but I don't think we should issue a spec for public review unless we think it is ready for public review, and that means that we as a TC think it is ready for publication except for truly editorial nits.  And the kind of wholesale rewriting and redefining of terminology--to say nothing of the issue of general versus strict task--go way beyond editorial nits.

 

So I would be against issuing the spec for public review until it is really ready for it.  And we still have to do our last non-public review first.

 

paul

 

From: Bruce Nevin (bnevin) [mailto:bnevin@cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, 2009 November 13 15:54
To: dita
Subject: [dita] Release date

 

 

 


From: Ogden, Jeff [mailto:jogden@ptc.com]
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 4:27 PM
To: Eliot Kimber; Joann Hackos; Michael Priestley
Cc: dita; Park Seth-R01164
Subject: RE: [dita] strict task vs. general task vs. the file naming and module rules

 

I'm thinking of starting a betting pool about if DITA 1.2 will be an officially approved OASIS standard before the next major release of Arbortext Editor comes out. The TC and OASIS have roughly 11 months to get this done to win that race. At this point it is not clear which side of this bet I’ll take myself.

 

    -Jeff 

 

A lot of our time consuming work now is on the spec. Would it speed the process if we plan to make additional spec refinements during and after public review? I don't know the process, but don't we expect that we might have changes come out of public review?  Planning for that, couldn't we identify some of the known readability and presentation issues that we would like to make better, and plan to do them in that time frame so that we can concentrate on the accuracy and substance issues before release for public review?

 

    /Bruce

 



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