| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 4 June 2013 uploaded
- From: Nancy Harrison<email@example.com>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 19:10:37 -0700 (PDT)
Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 4 June 2013
Recorded by N. Harrison
regrets: Adrian Warman, Scott Hudson, Tom Magliery, Michael Boses, Mark Myers
Minutes from last meetings:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/download.php/49493/minutes20130528.txt (28 May, Harrison)
These will be voted on next week.
SIDSC: Bob Beims
Bob gave an overview.
- Progress continues to be slow; participation took a hit when 2 [previously actively] participating companies - AMD & NXP - chose tonot renew their membership in OASIS; however, Altera, represented by Severin Foreman, has now joined the group.
- State of adoption of spec is still:
freescale is in active adoption of SIDSC specialization, all other companies are still looking at it. OTOH, most semicon companies are adopting DItA, if not SIDSC. Whether or not they'll find a way to manage their highly structured data with SIDSC, that's more of a step 3 or 4 in the maturity ladder of XML adoption
- State of SIDSC specialization as a standard:
We've had a SC draft in review for 18 mos, but with the churn in membership, we haven't had much progress. Bob aims to review/edit the draft within a few months. It's very important for Freescale; they need to be able to point to a 'definitive normative document'. He doesn't have a lot of resource to tap; though Altera is coming up to speed, they're not ready to commment on the details of the specialization. So Bob is just working on getting the spec updated with what Freescale has learned from their implementation. The SID SC is still having conference calls every 2 weeks.
- Kris; are you going ahead with plans to do this as a profile?
- Bob; yes, that seems to be the most viable way, even if it's a higher bar to get acceptance by OASIS.
- Bruce Wang; why so much attrition?
- Bob; The 2008 tech downturn was hugely significant for the semiconductor industry, and paying the OASIS dues just for participation in SIDSC was too much to ask.
- Don; Thanks, Bob, for your work
- Bob; In Freescale,we're very glad for work of this TC.
- Don; if you have an opportunity to do a conference presentation on what you did to use DITA for stuff other than documentation (e.g. at a desig automation conference), that would be really good for getting others to do so.
- Bob; We know the 'Tina the tech writer' syndrome. Engineers hate writing, so anything that makes them have to do less makes them happy. A selling point is the ability to create an 'executable specifiction.' The register specializations in SIDSC are from an IEEE standard, and we're now working with business processes that are encoded in an ISO standard.
- Joann; We're interested in how to expand usage. I'm working on an ISO standard that might use that; could this become part of an ISO or iEEE standard instead?
- Don; If anyone's having trouble keepng their company involved in OASIS, talk to Kris or me about that for rationales.
Other SC news:
Stan Doherty is now co-chair of TechComm SC.
Help SC (probably Stan) will report in July.
1. DITA 1.3 progress
Progress between 27 May-2 June: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201306/msg00000.html (Eberlein)
Update on deadlines: http://chris.nitchie.com/trellotrack/#511a73d76ee890a51c0007ed
Trello Board: https://trello.com/b/gPKH0OcF
Kris reviewed the current status with folks who have deadlines coming up;
removed 2 stage 2 proposals, 13087 and publishing map proposal.
13059; should be ready for discussion and review this weekend
13107; has been reviewed by DavidH, will be reviewed by Robert within next couple of days.
13089; Eliot thinks all reviewers are done, he gave issues to Mark; he's setting up RNG declarations to parallel. Kris asked about new language topics, are any in the stage 3 proposal? According to Eliot, no, so the languageis in the proposal, but ot the separate lang. ref. topics themselves. Kris suggested that he let Mark know that the lang. ref. topics need to be included.
Kris; when you get to stage 3, all new and modified lang. ref. topics have to be in place. shall I post this to list?
Eliot; that would be good; so as to clarify, to move from stage 2 to stage 3, next thing is to rewrite it in stage 3 template, adding any DTD markup and all the lang. ref. topics that need to be added or modified.
13112; Eliot said he wants to work on doing this in RNG; his goal to do it in RNG within the upcoming weeks.
2. DITA 1.3 proposals, stage 2: http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DITA_1.3_Proposals-stage2
Ready for discussion:
13090, updates to the DITAVAL @style attribute (Nitchie)
ChrisN; style att on prop element fro items to CDATA. instead of a pick list, it's a space-delimited list of tokens, one on previous list should be implemented by all processors. So chance to do custom tokens.
joann; don't think we have to say 'need not;
chris; maybe not, but I'd seen it elsewhere in spec
joann; kris, we should consider changing that
chris; also, i usually wrap in codeph, but no one else does. Su-laine sugested that all elements be wrapped inangle brackets and all att pt with an @ sign
kris; we're aware of the inconsistency in code tagging in spec
Chris; think having an XML domain will be helpful
kris; would make it much easier to search spec for same named elements and attributes
don; any questions for chrisn?
resolution; vote next week
Robt; gave oerview on ref'ing ditaval file fro map so it only applies to a branch. got good feedback , esp on edge cases (esp from eliot) on relevance to keys.
kris; shall we discuss this next week, when folks have chance to look at it
don; any questions for robt?
chris; looks like it precludes possiblity for using multiple files for a sigle branch. might be cases where have diff domains of filtering in diff files that you combine
e.g. one file for eah brand, but could have diff ditaval files aside from brand ditavals.
robt; within IBM we've had req to support multiple global ditavals, do it by passing list of ditaval files, so we concatenate files and treat as one. ditavalref doesn't support that. but it would be something to consider as way to do that
chris; but would this prop preclude bability to do that? seems so.
robt; right, couldn't provide more than one using ditavalref. but nothing to preclude ditavalref from pointing at a ilst of files.
don; should chris send a list on that to TC
chris; id di, and got no comments
also mentioned doing it as nstead of
chris; but having it as resource-only topicref is fine.
resolution; will leave t under discussion for ext week.
Ready for vote: Voting options are "Yes," "No," "No objections," "I don't understand the proposal," and "I have reservations"
3. DITA 1.3 proposals, stage 3: https://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DITA_1.3_Proposals-stage3
Ready to assign reviewers:
13111: MathML domain(Owner: Kimber; Reviewers: Anderson and Hamilton; reviewers assigned on 28 May 2013)
element (Owner: Kimber; Reviewers: Doherty & Day; reviewers assigned on 14 May 2013)
13027: Allow in more places (Owner: Kimber; Reviewers: Harrison & Tivy; reviewers assigned on 14 May 2013)
13029: Allow in more places (Owner: Kimber; Reviewers: Day & Hamilton; reviewers assigned on 14 May 2013)
13089: learningObjectMap and learningGroupMap (Owner: Myers; Reviewers: Kimber & Hudson; reviewers assigned on ?)
Ready for Discussion:
Ready for vote: Voting options are "Yes," "No," and "Abstain"
4. NEW ITEM: Improved Table Accessibility submission for Stage 1
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201305/msg00091.html (Hudson, 28 May)
Note: Follows from this previous discussion:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201303/msg00085.html (Hudson, 29 March)
Resolution: will continue this when Scott is on the call.
5. ITEM: Release DITA in 2014? 2017? 2018? (Eberlein, 28 May)
[Continued discussion of this ite, led by Kris]
- Kris; our last discussion ended when we weretalking about setting hard milestones; 8/01/2013 for having stage 2 proposals complete, and 12/01/2013 for stage 3 proposals.
- Nancy had some concerns about the ability of the TC to get [currently remaining] 21 Stage 2 proposals done by Aug 1st.
- Kris; the goal is to schedule as many as possible, withdraw any proposals not considered by their owners to be essential to 1.3, and maybe have some extra TC meetings.
- Deb; so then all of the proposals would have to go thru stage 3 ?
- Kris; yes, and we have to have really hard deadlines
- Robert; I think Aug. 1 will be difficult; i'm most wary about proposals that take a long time to discuss; if we can have extra meetings, that may help. but we'll see.
- Kris; I agree - l don't know if we can actually meet all these deadliens, but to get out in 2014 we have to put them in place.
- Deb; even 2015 will be tough,
- Kris; at the rate we're going right now, we're on track to release 1.3 in 2017; that looks really bad.
- Deb; Did folks vote in trello o on the proposals?
- Kris; we found that wasn't a very useful mechanism.
- Thilo; we need to try to do this; taking so long just doesn't look good.
- Chris; some of these will definitely have prolonged discussion.
- Kris; that definitely puches us to 2015.
- Robert; I was thinking the same as Chris, but I thought then w'd have to move the deadline to July 1.
- Kris; I'd like everyone to start withdrawing proposals that DITA 1.3 can go out without, and we really may have to have extra meetings.
call ended at 12:03
-- Nancy Harrison
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]