Re: [dita] Why Three Editions paper reviews

[Eliot Kimber <ekimber@contrext.com>]

I found the graphs confusing because of the apparent (but not actual)
parallel between the light-colored bars for 1.0, 1.1, and 1.2 and then the
three blue bars for 1.3--it wasn't immediately clear what the relation
was--I was trying to compare the three bars on the left with the three
bars on the right.

It might be clearer to have the 1.3 bar be a single bar divided into
segments along its length.

I would also make the DITA version labels bigger--they don't stand out
from the other numbers in the graphs and, coupled with the confusion
reported above, took me a minute to figure out what those were.

I'm not sure the byte size of the PDF is a useful measurement--there are
two many variables, including the resolution of included images (or the
number of included images) and PDF compression techniques applied, that
could result in vastly different sizes for the same number of pages.

Page count is probably the only reasonable measurement.

Also, do the tag counts include foreign vocabularies or only DITA
elements? It looks like only DITA elements, which is what it should be,
but just need to make sure (and might need a note to that effect since
built-in foreign vocabs are new in 1.3).

"Number of elements" should be "Number of element types"

Cheers,

E.

----
Eliot Kimber, Owner
Contrext, LLC
http://contrext.com




On 10/16/15, 2:06 PM, "Tom Magliery" <dita@lists.oasis-open.org on behalf
of tom.magliery@justsystems.com> wrote:

>A couple more people have added comments to the Why Three Editions paper
>review on DITAweb this week. Thanks to Chris and JoAnn for that.
> 
>If anyone else would like to have a review, please do so. I don't recall
>if we've said when we would "close" this review, but we want to keep this
>moving, so it would be wise to get your comments in sooner, not later.
> 
>Did anyone look at the charts I created for use in a completely
>refactored "Growth of DITA" topic? The idea is to eliminate the tables,
>which are hard to understand. The text of the topic would be adjusted to
>fit better with the charts. Here are the charts:
>http://tools.oasis-open.org/version-control/browse/wsvn/dita/committee-not
>es/editions/resources/charts_and_graphs_DRAFT.png
> 
>mag
> 
> 
>