DITA Technical Committee Minutes for 12 October 2010 (amended)

["Bruce Nevin (bnevin)" <bnevin@cisco.com>]

 

DITA Technical Committee Minutes for 12 October 2010
 
Chaired by Don Day <donday@bga.com>
Minutes recorded by Bruce Nevin <bnevin@cisco.com>
 
The DITA Technical Committee met on Tuesday, 12 October 2010 at 8:00 am PT for 55 minutes.
 
8:00-8:05 am PT: Roll call
Regrets: Kimber, Hamilton, Buchholz
Quorum was achieved. 

STANDING BUSINESS:

Approve minutes from previous business meeting:

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201010/msg00020.html (Oct. 5, Nevin)
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201010/msg00063.html (Oct. 6, Nevin)
Don moved to accept both, Kris seconded, approved by acclamation.

Subcommittee/liaison reports:
-----------------------------
OASIS DITA for Enterprise Business Documents Subcommittee (Michael Boses)

Work in two areas

  1. short-term focus on immediate needs, implementable within current standard.
   Three papers in process, one posted for internal review.
     - Recommended approach to implementation & interoperability between an aggregated doc, edited as a single doc, and storage of individual topics and map(s). Want maturity model that gives users somewhere to go as they become more fluent and conversant with DITA. Document posted. Looking for comments from TC. Many organizations waiting for guidance how to do this.
     - Constrained topic for education, demonstration, content modeling for specific use cases. Not trying to specialize <topic> for business, rather, something that makes it easier to connect people with DITA. Paper in a couple of weeks.
     - Reconciling idiosyncrasies of business docs and 'objections' claiming DITA isn't suitable for these types of bus docs. Third paper planned for November

  2. long-term information modeling, not sure if all attainable with specialization or requiring changes.
     - Posted PPT on a content metamodel, large in scope, a number of information models. What are the core types from which to specialize the bus doc types? Are they possibly ancestors of the existing types as well?

Discussion:

Michael P: That last would be backwards incompatible. Could come up for DITA 2.0. Question would be what is the business value?
MB: We really have taken that to heart in our investigations. Let's identify our business types, and try to specialize them from existing resources. If there is no other route, then we address the more challenging questions.
MP: If we can't specialize directly from <topic>, then that suggests that we need to expand <topic> rather than introducing a new ancestor to <topic>. We went through this with loosening <task> and reintroducing strict task with constraints. The inheritance relationships that we support are very specific and have very specific baggage. 
MB: We realize all that. We don't want to prejudge the process. We're trying to understand the requirements and express them for the TC to determine what to do. One member of the Pharma group posted an email to that group today asking how this relates to what they're doing. Can our SC deal with the structural issues in a general way so that each SC doesn't have to address them independently? Can we help enterprise architects understand how e.g. <task> relates to an SOP. 
MP: No concerns for the first activity. Look forward to reviewing the technical details of the proposal. Am concerned about: can BusDocs SC help other groups understand how they work together without understanding how DITA works. Extending model without regard to technical limitations of DITA, developing a model that isn't expressible in DITA. At some point abstract model guidance becomes technical guidance.
MB: We thought we were providing guidance to the TC, who would then provide guidance to the SCs.
MP: OK. I'm comfortable we'll have the right checks and balances. Handing the abstract model to the TC to figure out is fine.
MB: Concern is that when we post a document, it's available to all SCs. Early this year we were told all SC activity must be on the OASIS site, no longer circulated through email. A number of our members are on the Pharma SC, hence the overlap. We're not purposely going to contact SCs.
MP: Just be very careful of that line. The current model is not technically implementable, it's going to have to evolve as we get into the techinical implementation side. Put some disclaimers around it, emphasize the abstract nature of it, that it's not currently implementable.
Don: One additional safeguard, maybe a TC member who is aware of these concerns might attend the SC meetings periodically in a mentor/liaison kind of role.
MB: That would be extremely welcome. It's always been a resource issue. 
Don: Can someone volunteer to sit in for a month or so?
MP: As the `voice of annoyance', I wish it could be me. The work that the SC is doing is vitally important, but I'm spread too thin at the moment.
: For DITA and composite environments, we came up with a feature request that was technically not implementable. Is there a code word under which to talk in papers and not shut down creativity.
MB: A standard disclaimer would be wonderful. 
Don, MP: Let's pursue that on the alias.
Don: Can you monitor the list discussion, Michael. Kris: Can you serve that role, Don? Don: OK, I'll listen in for a couple of weeks.
Doug Morrison: Suggest a short white paper providing guidance as to what's not implementable, and how to make such an idea implementable. Don: This is a best practices idea. Let's log this as an idea for the Adoption TC.

ACTION: Don: Attend BusDocs SC meetings
ACTION: Bruce: Send JoAnn email about best practices paper idea.

BUSINESS:

1. ITEM: Follow up on still-pending ballot:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201010/msg00064.html
  All voting TC members have voted.
  o Statements of use--all consistent and adequate? 
    1.Staging of materials for OASIS review?
    See http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/Committee%20specification%20submission
    A list of everything we need to do to move forward.
> Kris: Mary has everything she needs. Waiting for responses to a couple of email messages to her.
  o Review old/new rules actions
> Mary will be proceeding under the old rules.
  o Canvassing discussion
> Michael P: Haven't made the IBM-internal contact for advice yet. 
> Prior experience tells us that the total number of members for calculating 15% is based on one vote per company membership.
> Not all companies in the DITA TC, not all are participating at a high level. This is not about persuasion as to the merits of DITA, it's about apathy and member responsibility.

2. New ITEM: Lessons learned on recalled Review issue
  o After public review, carefully assess whether any change was substantial. If not, 15-day Review is not warranted.
> Make note of this for 1.3.
  o Ballot preparation is based on attendance record; be strategic about attendance on key events like this.
> Kavi logs do not automatically promote and demote based on attendance status. JoAnn and Gershon were out on the two days when we had two meetings back to back, hence disqualified. To have one's name on record as voting on an important decision like this, we need to strategize. JoAnn, and Gershon have been very active and productive members for a long time.
> We have great concern about OASIS policy and its application. JoAnn and Gershon are both considering possibility of resigning from OASIS.
ACTION: Don: Write note to interested parties in OASIS.

8:50-8:55 Announcements/Opens

8:55 Adjourn