[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming
Jang, you have eloquently expressed the unease I felt about the course of the discussion. I like your minimalist approach--it says what it needs to say while leaving the responsibility for how the information is used up to the user without discouraging their interest in the potential of the exploratory work. I endorse this approach. I might suggest only the consideration of adding a word that adds a bit of length to the leash: "It is not *necessarily* a reliable guide..." -- Don Day Chair, OASIS DITA TC On 10/20/2010 1:40 PM, Jang F.M. Graat wrote: > Hello all, > > After listening / reading quietly for over a year, here's my first 2 > cents, about the disclaimer discussion: > > Being a minimalist at heart, I would use fewer words and rephrase the > disclaimer as follows: > > "This document reflects exploratory work. It is not a reliable guide > on the future direction of DITA. It should not be taken as guidance > for using DITA or for developing DITA tools." > > The fact that it is work by a subcommittee is irrelevant, as > exploratory papers may also be produced by the TC as a whole, right ? > So leaving out the reference to the subcommittee makes the statement > useful for any exploratory document that might emerge out of the DITA > TC community. Also, the fact that it is not endorsed or approved by > the TC is irrelevant, as that is not the nature of exploratory > documents. They are meant to be input for discussions, not proposals > to be approved. Each document will have some reference to the > authorship, which may be an individual TC or SC member or an SC or > even the TC as a whole. It can still be exploratory, and should not be > taken as definitive. That is all we're trying to state. So leave out > all the redundant and irrelevant information. > > Jang F.M. Graat > Travelling philosopher > www.jang.nl > > > On 20 okt 2010, at 18:23, Bruce Nevin (bnevin) wrote: > >> Re the added phrase: >> >>> and is not endorsed by the DITA Technical Committee as a whole >> >> We don't want it to sound like the TC disapproves of this work (or even >> of SC work in general). How about something like "has not yet been taken >> up as work of the Technical Committee as a whole"? That might look like >> this: >> >> "Because this document reflects exploratory work by a subcommittee >> of the DITA Technical Committee, which has not yet been taken up >> as work of the Technical Committee as a whole, it is not a reliable >> guide as to the future direction of DITA, and should not be taken >> as guidance for using DITA or for developing DITA tools." >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> From: Michael Priestley [mailto:mpriestl@ca.ibm.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 10:01 AM >> To: Su-Laine Yeo >> Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming >> >> >> >> Sounds good to me. I'll add a quick thought for Michael B's >> question: >> >> > - refrain from presenting subcommittee work as >> an official OASIS >> >TC position in a public forum (webinar, conference, white >> paper, etc) >> > >> >I still need clarification on the second issue, as my >> understanding may >> >allow more exposure of the subcommittee work than the TC would >> like. >> >> I think the key phrase there is "as an official TC position". If >> it's presented as exploratory work to solicit feedback, I personally >> don't see any problem with that. But if it's presented as established >> strategy or direction, that would be dangerously misleading. >> >> Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) >> Lead IBM DITA Architect >> mpriestl@ca.ibm.com >> http://dita.xml.org/blog/25 <http://dita.xml.org/blog/25> >> >> >> >> From: "Su-Laine Yeo" <su-laine.yeo@justsystems.com> >> To: <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> >> Date: 10/19/2010 05:46 PM >> Subject: RE: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming >> >> ________________________________ >> >> >> >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> Longer-term, I think we should move in the direction of having >> variety >> of standardized messages to display on documents to indicate >> their level >> of official-ness and final-ness, and put a message on every >> single >> document and web page that we make visible to the public. I'm >> more >> concerned about the public finding the TC's outdated versions of >> technical proposals for DITA features than about the public >> reading SC >> documents. Also, a lot of publicly-available content on OASIS's >> websites >> is simply the ideas of one or more individual TC members and >> isn't even >> approved by a subcommittee, and that stuff needs disclaimers >> most of >> all. But all that will require more mulling-over for a later >> time. End >> of rant for now ;) >> >> For our immediate needs, I think the gist of Bruce's suggestion >> is good, >> and suggest the following rewordings for clarity: >> >> "This document reflects exploratory work by a subcommittee of >> the DITA >> Technical Committee and is not endorsed by the DITA Technical >> Committee >> as a whole. It is not a reliable guide as to the future >> direction of >> DITA, and should not be taken as guidance for using DITA or for >> developing DITA tools." >> >> W.r.t. Michael's request for guidance on the second issue he >> described, >> I don't have any thoughts at this time, although I appreciate >> the >> question. >> >> Cheers, >> Su-Laine >> >> Su-Laine Yeo >> Solutions Consultant >> JustSystems Canada, Inc. >> Office: 778-327-6356 >> syeo@justsystems.com >> >> XMetaL Community Forums: http://forums.xmetal.com >> <http://forums.xmetal.com/> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Michael Boses [mailto:mboses@QUARK.com >> <mailto:mboses@QUARK.com> ] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:33 AM >> To: Doug Morrison; dita@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: RE: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming >> >> Doug, I see the point that many entities outside of the DITA TC >> provide >> guidance. I think the issue here is clarification that >> subcommittees do >> not issue guidance. Official OASIS Guidance, when it originates >> in a >> subcommittee, is the result of subcommittee deliverables being >> vetted >> and incorporated into guidance by the parent committee. >> >> At least this is how I understand it as someone trying to follow >> the >> rules as a subcommittee co-chair. There are two things we have >> been >> asked to do: >> >> - place a caveat on our posts indicating their >> status as not >> approved for implementation (It looks like Bruce's wording >> achieves >> that). >> >> - refrain from presenting subcommittee work as >> an official OASIS >> TC position in a public forum (webinar, conference, white paper, >> etc) >> >> I still need clarification on the second issue, as my >> understanding may >> allow more exposure of the subcommittee work than the TC would >> like. >> Presenting some of the ideas of our subcommittee is the best way >> to vet >> them with the actual stakeholders in external organizations. We >> certainly can pass on that opportunity, but I need to make sure >> that is >> the TC's intention. It may be that any public presentations we >> make will >> need to include a disclaimer similar to the one we will place on >> posts. >> >> Perhaps, Don, Michael, or others on the TC can clarify if and >> how we >> handle informing the public on progress and obtaining feedback. >> >> Regards, >> >> Michael Boses >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Doug Morrison [mailto:dmorrison@dita4all.com >> <mailto:dmorrison@dita4all.com> ] >> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 11:07 AM >> To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org >> Subject: Re: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming >> >> I think the final sentence "Such guidance is exclusively in the >> >> purview of the DITA Technical Committee" should be dropped - >> because it >> is not true as it stands, and not necessary. >> >> Regards, >> >> Doug Morrison >> Information Architect >> http://dita4all.com <http://dita4all.com/> >> >> >> On 13/10/2010 15:33, Bruce Nevin (bnevin) wrote: >> > In yesterday's call, we talked about subcommittees needing >> some kind >> of >> > cover for creative discussion and brainstorming so that >> outside >> readers >> > of the discussion won't take it as guidance from the TC. The >> relevant >> > bit from the minutes (as amended to include Seth's name): >> > >> >> Seth Park: 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. >> > I imagine two aspects of a disclaimer, its content and its >> location. >> > >> > For example, on the title page or in a footnote on the title >> or in a >> > note paragraph placed prominently on the first page (to be >> decided), a >> > subcommittee document might say something like: >> > >> > This paper reflects exploratory work by a subcommittee of the >> DITA >> > Technical Committee. It is not a reliable guide as to the >> future >> > direction of DITA, and should not be taken as guidance for >> implementing >> > or using DITA. Such guidance is exclusively in the purview of >> the DITA >> > Technical Committee. >> > >> > Let the discussion begin! >> > >> > /B >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS >> TC that >> > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in >> OASIS at: >> > >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >> <https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC >> that >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS >> at: >> >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >> <https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC >> that >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS >> at: >> >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >> <https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC >> that >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS >> at: >> >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >> <https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]