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] DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 26 April 2011 rev.


So, to summarize explicitly, at the place where the minutes now say:

3. ITEM: Question on "Elements that may refer to elements within maps or topics"

* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201103/msg00068.html (Yeo)

the minutes are amended to say:

3. ITEM: Question on "Elements that may refer to elements within maps or topics"

* http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201103/msg00068.html (Yeo)

> Not discussed.

3a. "ITEM: How should elements with keyref attributes be rendered?" which was last discussed here:

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201104/msg00034.html

Does that do it, or are you uncomfortable with the practice we have been following, of including email comments in the minutes by reference when we approve the minutes?

    /Bruce



From: Su-Laine Yeo [mailto:su-laine.yeo@justsystems.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 6:59 PM
To: Don Day (LbW); Bruce Nevin (bnevin)
Cc: John Hunt; Mark Lewis
Subject: RE: [dita] DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 26 April 2011 rev.

I think the minutes should reflect what was actually discussed in the meeting. The minutes as currently written say that various comments were made about the question on "Elements that may refer to elements within maps or topics". The comments that were made were about a completely different topic. How is this not an error in the minutes?

 

Perhaps you could leave item #3 in the minutes, add a sentence underneath saying that this issue was not discussed, and then add a new item #3.1 below it with a heading that describes the issue that was discussed?

 

Su-Laine

 

 

 

From: Don Day (LbW) [mailto:donday@learningbywrote.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 3:08 PM
To: Bruce Nevin (bnevin)
Cc: Su-Laine Yeo; John Hunt; Mark Lewis
Subject: Re: [dita] DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 26 April 2011 rev.

 

I'm all for whatever is least work for you, Bruce. Let's go with your suggestion. If agenda quirks were not mentioned during the meeting, and we did business without noticing the disconnect, it's not strictly an error in the minutes, and we'll correct the agenda for the next time.

--

"Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?

Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"

--T.S. Eliot


On 4/28/2011 3:56 PM, Bruce Nevin (bnevin) wrote:

Hi, Su-Laine. Since this affects the agenda as well as the minutes, I
figured I would leave it to Don to follow his usual practice and
incorporate it by reference at the point where we approve the minutes in
next week's agenda. 
 
As John's message didn't reference the minutes or clearly say that it
was responsive to Paul's request for URLs, and because it fleshed out my
record of their report nicely, I thought it best to include that content
in updated text. Mark had also sent me a message with just the URLs but
I hadn't got around to acting on it. 
 
I hope that works OK for all concerned.
 
        /B
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Su-Laine Yeo [mailto:su-laine.yeo@justsystems.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 2:34 PM
To: Bruce Nevin (bnevin)
Subject: RE: [dita] DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 
26 April 2011 rev.
 
Hi Bruce,
 
Did you get the attached message?
 
Cheers,
Su-Laine
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Nevin (bnevin) [mailto:bnevin@cisco.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2011 11:04 AM
To: dita
Subject: [dita] DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 26 
April 2011 rev.
 
 
 
 

 



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