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: 13097 Troubeshooting topic


Hi,

I have made some changes to the model for 13097, troubleshooting topic, that should address most of the concerns raised by Dan Dionne from IBM about using the new troubleshooting model as basis for refactoring the IBM troubleshooting specialization.

I made three changes to the most recent model:

  1. The troublebody element content model was reverted to its original looser model to accommodate the IBM troubleshooting structure. Here are the specifics:

    Older, incompatible model:

    (%condition;?,
     %cause;?,
     %remedy;?,
     %troubleSolution;*
    )


    Newest, compatible model:

    (%condition;?,
       (%cause; |
        %remedy; |
        %troubleSolution;)*

    )

  2. responsibleParty now inherits from topic/p instead of topic/data. This means that the ts*Response elements in the IBM specialization that currently inherit from "topic/p" could inherit from "topic/p troubleshooting/responsibleParty". Here are the specifics:

    Older model:

    <!ATTLIST responsibleParty %global-atts;  class CDATA "- topic/data troubleshooting/responsibleParty ">

    Newest model:

    <!ATTLIST responsibleParty %global-atts;  class CDATA "- topic/p troubleshooting/responsibleParty ">

  3. The content model for responsibleParty changes from EMPTY %para.cnt; which is the same model that the ts*Response elements use in the IBM specialization.

The attached PDF shows the 13097 Stage 2 proposal with these changes cut in. I will update the official stage 2 documentation after meeting with the interested parties at IBM.

The following observations from Dan Dionne's are not addressed in this latest update:
  • Repeated availability of <title> in <remedy>. I passed on this because the availability of <title> serves the same purpose here that it does in <section>. From an authoring perspective, I agree that this is unfortunate; however, proposal 13097 is not the correct place to address this issue.
  • Availability of <steps> and <steps-unordered> in <remedy>. I passed on this because having these elements available in <remedy> is one of the main capabilities requested by the writing community.
I look forward to meeting with the interested parties at IBM at their earliest possible convenience.

Best Regards,

--
Bob Thomas
+1 720 201 8260
Skype: bob.thomas.colorado
Instant messaging: Gmail chat (bob.thomas@tagsmiths.com) or Skype
Time zone: Mountain (GMT-7)


Attachment: troubleshootingTopic_Feature13097_Phase2_Composite_11augl13.dita.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document



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