[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 9 August 2011
|
DITA Technical Committee Meeting Minutes: 9 August 2011 Chaired by Don Day <donday@bga.com> Minutes recorded by Bruce Nevin <bnevin@cisco.com> The DITA Technical Committee met on Tuesday, 9 August 2011 at 08:00am PT for 55 minutes. 8:00-8:05 Roll call * Regrets: Kris Eberlein, Adrian Warman > Quorum was established. > A new scribe is needed. This is a highly visible opportunity with many benefits as pointed out by Don in email. STANDING BUSINESS: Approve minutes from previous business meeting: * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201108/msg00004.html (Nevin, 2 August 2011) Moved by Don, seconded by Dick Hamilton, approved by acclamation. Subcommittee/liaison reports: * OASIS DITA Adoption TC (JoAnn, 9 August) o Working to settle the stylesheet issue with Oasis, working with Chet Ensign (the "new Mary McCrae"). We have the old specs for PDF, nothing for HTML. Questions sent last week, no response yet. o Work on articles is ongoing. The first with the new process is on DITA and XLIFF is on the wiki. Reviewing an article on machinery task by Jan Graat. Bruce's two articles on generic text and on specialized convenience elements in maps need someone else to take them over. Being an author for the Adoption TC is a highly visible opportunity, and it can pave the way for conference presentations, etc. Don will determine with Lisa Dyer as to which comes first in the next two weeks, OASIS DITA for Programmers Subcommittee (Lisa), or OASIS DITA Technical Communication Subcommittee (JoAnn) BUSINESS: 1. ITEM: Triage of DITA complexity list and potential solutions o Wiki page: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DITA_Perceptions o NEW: Stan's summary: http://lists.oasis- open.org/archives/dita/201106/msg00027.html * Closure pending open actions > No discussion this week. 2. ITEM: Triage of DITA_1.3_Proposals list o Wiki page: http://wiki.oasis- open.org/dita/DITA_1.3_Proposals 13031: Extending the highlight domain: element for strikeouts. The semantic function of strikeouts is good to capture. Don supports as an obvious element, but one that we would not expect to be specialized. Overbar should be added with it. With underscore these are the three most common cases. <flag> usually has a property indicating low or high, is this subsumed as a flag? No, this is among the typographic conventions that pervade financial documents. Will it be markup or a property? Highlight should include a list of all the values available in ditaval. There's an argument for having all typographic matters be properties as distinct from semantic elements. Is there any objection to topographic matters being like strikeout being redundantly conveyed both by elements and by properties? There's no well defined way to handle all such properties in DITA. These are design issues. Motion to accept the core proposal. ACCEPTED 13034: "formatting" domain for capturing arbitrary formatting. This is a problem in the publishing domain, though it may seem excessive from a tech docs point of view. Does this add too much to complexity? Do we publish such things separately as committee? This sounds like styles. It's not appropriate for DITA right now, but should be taken up by a subcommittee. Eliot doesn't have a community yet to form that subcommittee. This represents a community of practice, more than the TC as a whole. Proposed to make this the business of a future subcommittee. No disagreement. Eliot identified "publisher" items to move into a separate list, and will coordinate with Robert on the disposition of the list of 1.3 proposals. 13032-13034 are all available in the DITA for Publishers project, and there's no barrier to their use. 13032: As much about fixing <bookmap> as it is about a publishing domain. Because <bookmap> is a single map domain, it doesn't provide any mechanism for extension, and that affects a number of technical documentation cases. Have publication metadata in a separate domain from topicmeta, as pioneered by learning and training. <bookmap> doesn't allow any peer to chapter, but a map domain could. In a publication it's common to have a chapter followed by parts. By being overconstrained, <bookmap> blocks some legitimate uses, parallel to the case with <task> and <strict-task>. Given a general domain for pub metadata and a domain for topics we could do that. We need a way of saying map A represents a publication and map B doesn't, it's a root map that's not intended to be a publication. JoAnn: let's be careful about making it difficult to teach people how to author and lose adopters. People were wanting to use DITA without having to hire a consultant. Eliot: Has users whose requirements cannot be met. The proposal is sufficiently general that it will not constrain others. Don: what would be the loss if this were not included. Eliot: Users with such use cases would have to replicate the work done in the DTIA for publishers project. Nancy: but that's available. Eliot: Most users won't see that, or won't see their situation as a publisher's use case. We've already codified an approach through the L&T model, but that's too specialized. There's a map metadata domain for richer metadata, and there's a publication map domain with a catalog of topicref types for all kinds of things that can occur in a publication, wrappers around groups, mapref types, topicref types that can be the root of submaps, that sort of thing. These can be combined in one domain, or mixed into existing domains. We'll have to continue the discussion in email and on the call next week. 8:50-8:55 PT Announcements/Opens 8:55 PT Adjourn
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]