| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 24 May 2016 uploaded
- From: Nancy Harrison<firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2016 17:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
1. Robert will add Julio's discovery about the incorrect text in the 'ux-window' element langref topic to the 1.3 errata list with need for a new example.
2. Robert will add mention of the issue with xrefs to items outside map topicsthis to the 2.0 wiki page
3. Kris and Robert will come up with a list of items that are either officially deprecated, marked as 'reerved for future use', or generally expected to be removed in 2.0 for next week.
Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 24 May 2016
Recorded by Nancy Harrison
link to agenda for this meeting:
Regrets: Stan, Joann, Joe
Approve minutes from previous business meeting:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00030.html (Nancy Harrison, for 17 May 2016)
Proposed by Kris, seconded by Dick, approved by TC
1. Action items
10 May 2016:
Robert and Eliot: Schedule meeting to start work on content model generation (Language Reference topics)
[no meeting scheduled, but discussed the issue]
Bob and Nancy: Schedule meeting to start work on builds and style sheet changes needed for 1.3 errata; include Kris
[waiting for Bob to be fully recovered from surgery]
Kris: Provide Joe Storbeck an orientation to DITAweb (Completed)
26 May 2016:
Stan and Keith: Investigate use of Agile among standards organization
Kris; this is not a very specific ActionItem (too general), I'll move it to the general agenda for next week.
Scott: Contact Chet about OASIS Jira
Scott; a Jira instance is already in place for our TC; I created some components for it; chet sent scott a number of docs on how different groups are using Jira, and how best to use it. I'm still following up on an agile plugin for Jira, so we can set up sprints and a kanban board, This tool has good features, but they're not integrated into the OASIS implwementation of Jira; I can forward my thread w/Chet to TC; Jira queue is now open to TC members to submit reqs and feature requests. A number of TCs are already successfully using Jira (e.g., OData, Tosca) to manage work; we can look at their queues and see how they're managing work with Jira. I've set up ours with a few components for us, including a '1.3' component.
Kris; please forward the info you got to the list. we may want to hold off setting up a 2.0 component till we know more about it. Anyone interested in taking a more in-depth look?
Nancy; I'd like a tour of Jira/agile at some point.
Kris; scott, how do you want to move forward?
Scott; I'll check with chet on updating some agile features with Jira, and how we'd like to move forward with components and structure for that.
Bob and Nancy: Examine template for DITA 1.3 errata document
New members: None
3. New item: Fwd: ux-window
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00028.html (Forwarded by Eberlein, 18 May 2016)
Kris; this is a question about the langref topic for ux-window; do we need something in the errata? Julio's example shows values as percentages, but the text says 'value is a real number followed by a unit of measure'.
Robert; yup, needs to be in the errata
ActionItem; Robert will add Julio's discovery about the incorrect text in the 'ux-window' element langref topic to the 1.3 errata list with need for a new example.
4. New item: xrefs outside the map topics
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00031.html (Tivy, 24 May 2016)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00035.html (Kimber, 24 May 2016)
Jim; I think Eliot's explanation is pretty clear; the only other issue is that the spec doesn't really suggest it quite as strongly as Eliot does in his mail. 'xref shouldn't have ?? if you're using srefs' Maybe the spec should address this in a section either on xref or maps. The language used to refer to topics included in the maps, but some terms are not defined; I couldn't find text as crisp as Eliot's response.
Kris; thoughts from the TC? nothing we can do in 1.3 or 1.3 errata, but do we want to fix in 2.0
Eliot; there's lots we can do to fix it in the spec, but nothing we can do now.
Kris; we'll have to pick this up at a better time.
Nancy; do we have a place for that?
Kris; it goes in the 2.0 wiki for now; we can add this to that.
ActionItem: Robert will add mention of the issue with xrefs to items outside map topicsthis to the 2.0 wiki page
5. Continuing item: DITA 1.3 errata
Editors: Robert Anderson and Kris Eberlein
Style sheets: Bob Thomas
Build: Nancy Harrison
Reviews: Joe Storbeck
SEO: Keith Schengli-Roberts
Set up @rev for errata; work errata items related to source (completed to date)
Robert; the fix went into SVN
Correct content model topics
[no updates so far]
Search engine optimization
[hold for keith]
Template from TC Admin: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00017.html
6. Continuing item: Work on committee notes
Update to "Why Three Editions"
"Upgrading to a new version of DITA" (was "Upgrading to DITA 1.3")
task group (Kris, nancy, Robert) had a meaeting, lots of ideas, need to narrow down to a good set of information. Another meeting planned for later this week. (5/25 @11am ET)
Template from TC Admin: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00008.html
7. Continuing item: DITA 2.0 discussion
What deprecated elements need to be removed?
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00019.html (Eberlein, 17 May 2016)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00020.html (Kimber, 17 May 2016)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00021.html (Anderson, 17 May 2016)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00022.html (Magliery, 17 May 2016)
[continued from last week]
Robert; no more specific ideas, but glad to see suggestions.
Kris; surprised so much discussion on highlighting.
Eliot; the element i wonder about is 'data-about', no one seems to use it, and the OT doesn't do anything with it.
Jang; i started using it last week, in lieu of something better.
Eliot; you could use data instead of that, since data can nest; most of the use I've seen of it is tag abuse.
Robert; this one came from erik hennum; he made a fine distinction between data and data-about, probably too fine to make sense.
Kris; one thing to look at for 2.0; ecamine all the erik-designed elements.
Robert; data-about is a good candidate for removal or putting it in a separate spec.
Robert; two things to consider something that has a good use case that no one has actually used, thinking also about deprecated elements and resistance to removing them; anything we have prev. marked deprecated, or 'reserved for future use', should be removed 3 options; remove it (default) 2. if users are abusing it, point to better way of doing things and remove, 3. un-deprecate it, but with a whole new proposal, since we're re-defining something
Kris; a useful summary, thanks Robert.
Robert; not many elements that fall into that category, but there are some there from DITA 1.1 or 1.0; we should get rid of them unless someone has a better idea for them and proposes it.
Kris; other TC members views on Robert's suggestion?
Jim; I think it's a good idea; wrt; data-about, it's documentation is woven into the discussion of 'data', so if a subject isn't the parent of 'data', you can tag the subject with 'data-about'. I think removing it means nobody has a subject that isn't the parent. so I might be worried about that kind of an assumption.
Robert; the approach i'm suggestion doesn't actually apply to data-about...
Jim; i'm not arguing with your approadch, just going back to data-about.
Robert; for data-about, i think it should have a black mark, because no one uses it correctly (?) now, but the alternative is to widen its scope.
Eliot; you can do what data-about is about with other ways, including with subjectscheme, it as though data-about was an impoverished method of doing what subjectscheme does.
Kris; it would be helpful for us to go thru all deprecated items, if we have a list o them
Robert; I can give you a list of them; pretty small
Kris; deprecated l&t items, deprecated boolean,
Robert; some deprecated attributes
Kris; i'd just like us to have a list of all of them
nancy; what about topicsetref
Kris; that falls into the category of 'elements that are really duplicates' not yet deprecated
Jang; i'd propose 'hazardstatement', it needs to be redesigned, and it shouldn't be in base DITA but somewhere else, so it has some serious flaws. That's probably why no one uses it.
bob; we need a new new category called 'rehabilitation'.
Kris; i nominate 'chunking' for rehab.
ActionItem; Robert will add Jangs' hazardstatement suggestion to list of proposed 2.0 items
ActionItem: Kris and Robert will come up with a list of items that are either officially deprecated, marked as 'reerved for future use', or generally expected to be removed in 2.0 for next week.
Kris; any thoughts on how to continue with 2.0 discussion next week?
8. New item: DITA 2.0 planning: What the deprecated query attribute means to future DITA
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00023.html (Day, 17 May 2016)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201605/msg00026.html (Kimber, 17 May 2016)
Don gave a summary; we don't necessarily need query @, there's no implementation for it anyway. it came from the concept of collections as a target, and the concept of remote procedure calls. a query that doesn't invoke a web page, but calls something else. how do we discuss @href and the concept of what DITA can point to in a rendered instance?
Eliot; repeat please?
Don; in a typical DITA build, all srefs point to something; this @ implies the idea of a collection as an endpoint; so, for example, a URL could resolve to allow one or more topics to be retrieved; it makes no sense in PDF, but it does make some in a web. It gives you choices. Another use for a URL is as a process, not a page.
Eliot; i don't think we want to generalize that to @href. A URL can point to anything, but href doesn't have to know about that. I don't think the DITA standard itself needs to say anything about the URL it points at. It could be a value for a separate document that talks about the possible implementaations, but it doesn't belong in the standard itself.
Don; the point i'm making is that @query is there to hold open the placeholder for space between build-based resolution and query-based resolution, which holds the @query value until rendition time. If we can explain that, we can explain @query better.
Eliot; is there a way to signal on your topicref whether resolutions is expected to be more or less dynamic, so an author could state whether they expected the reolution to be more or less dynamic?
Don; a system may determine the possibility of whether it can be or not.
chris; but you could use the @format for that as well, so we may not need another @.
Eliot; @format should be saying 'this is what data should be like when it's returned'. So we may be lacking a parallel to the format @ that lets us say more about the processing and details of the URI.
Don; so the role of the URI processor could be better defined as an architecture component in 2.0
Kris; or maybe not
Eliot; because DITA is a web application, it details all URI resolution to somewhere else.
[continued to next week]
9. Volunteer opportunities:
Create amalgamated minutes for 2014 (Completed by Nancy Harrison on 17 May 2016)
Create amalgamated minutes for 2015 (Completed by Nancy Harrison on 17 May 2016)
Harvest information about DITA 1.3 lessons learned from TC minutes 2014-2015 (Completed by Kris Eberlein on 17 May 2016)
Kris; I looked for lessons learned and 2.0 items posted to list; had 2/3 mtgs where we discussed broad outlines of 2.0
11:59 PM ET Close
-- Ms. Nancy Harrison
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]