|
And a critical addition:
- Expanding DITA into new markets: Web developments and ones
that we don't know of yet
Best,
Kris
Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
www.eberleinconsulting.com
+1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)
On 10/18/2016 5:57 PM, Kristen James
Eberlein wrote:
We mentioned the following drivers on the DITA TC call today:
- Desire for a subset of full DITA that is less complex,
simpler to author, and cheaper/easier to build tools to
support
- Easier specialization
- Tooling to make easier specialization possible
- Ability to have HTML and Markdown versions to enable
contribution from authors who want to author in that format
- Commitment to interoperability; Lightweight DITA must
be able to be absorbed by full DITA. (The reverse is not the
case.)
- Current plans for Lightweight DITA to have elements and
attributes that are not available in DITA 1.3, such as
<video>, <audio>, @specmodel and more
Am I missing any of the key points that were raised? I think I am
...
I'd encourage DITA TC voting members to think about the following:
- How would you rank these different drivers? Are some more
important to you than others?
- Do you think that Lightweight DITA might be delivered in
phases? If so, what would you want to see first?
- Do you think that some of these drivers affect each other?
Or be in conflict with each other? If so, how can that be
mitigated?
How can we best promote discussion on the DITA TC about
Lightweight DITA and where the subcommittee is currently at?
- Regular item on the agenda
- Survey
- Other thoughts?
For folks who were on today's call but silent, I'd be happy to
have calls with you.
Cc'd to the Lightweight DITA subcommittee.
--
Best,
Kris
Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
www.eberleinconsulting.com
+1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)
|