| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 9 May 2017 uploaded
- From: Nancy Harrison<firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 11:34:12 -0700 (PDT)
1. Kris will modify Kavi to make Dawn and Amber chairs of the L&T SC.
2. Eliot will do a review pas on Kris's new version of errata 02 once she QAs it.
3. Robert will fix the spec error listing @datatype as an @ for fn.
Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 9 May 2017
Recorded by Nancy Harrison
link to agenda for this meeting:
1. Roll call
Regrets: Dick Hamilton, Eric Sirois, Keith Schengili-Roberts, Tom Magliery, Carsten Brennecke
2. Approve minutes from business meeting on 04 April 2017:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201705/msg00016.html (Nancy Harrison, update posted on 08 May 2017)
moved by Kris, 2nd by Dawn, approved by TC
3. Approve minutes from business meeting on 02 May 2017:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201705/msg00015.html (Nancy Harrison, posted 08 May 2017)
moved by Kris, 2nd by Don, approved by TC
New TC members: None
5. Action items
6 September 2016
Kris: Revise subject scheme example topic pulled from errata 01
4 October 2016:
Kris; no progress yet
Tom: Work on aggregated minutes for 2005-2011 (IN PROGRESS)
25 October 2016
Deb: Develop FAQ for folks new to DITA TC (IN PROGRESS)
21 March 2017
Deb; do we want to put this on dita.xml.org?
Kris; maybe, but first we need it internally for new TC folks. Maybe you could throw some ideas together and get feedback from the TC on them.
Kris: Post to L&T SC, TC list, and dita-users about closing L&T subcommittee if no leadership steps forward (COMPLETED)
Kris: Communicate formally with Dawn Stevens and Amber Swope about possibly closing L&T SC (COMPLETED)
Kris; see agenda item #6.
Chris: Post to TC list about his thoughts for modifying bookmap design
Chris; will do this next week.
Kris; this is ideas for how to fix old bookmap rather than about creating books from a regular map.
04 April 2017
All TC members consider what they want to see on the new DITA.xml.org site for the DITA TC
Kris; since Keith is out, please do this for next week.
Kris: Rebuild keys for errata 02 publication (COMPLETED)
Kris; see agenda item #7
6. Update on Learning & training subcommittee
Kris; A few updates;
- Amber and Dawn have agreed to be co-chairs for L&T.
- Mark myers has agreed to consider finding a way to join the TC so that he can work on this.
- mail from Birgit Strackenbrock about L&T and its value to her organization; she may be willing to work with the SC on it.
ActionItem; Kris will modify Kavi to make Dawn and Amber chairs of the L&T SC. Kris; Dawn, can you schedule a SC meeting?
Dawn; I'll do that, and also check out other possible members.
7. DITA 1.3 Errata 02
- Wiki page for DITA 1.3 Errata 02
- OASIS links for errata 02
- Kris; I've updated keys for errata 02; we didn't have things correct for errata 01, but OASIS let us publish it anyway. We now have a lengthy document from Paul Knight on how cover pages for errata docs should look. I've done a first pass at updating errata 02 cover page resources; it's up on Github. I'll QA it then ask a volunteer to check it again with new eyes.
- Eliot; I'll do that
ActionItem; Eliot will do a review pas on Kris's new version once she QAs it.
- Style sheets
- Kris; Bob, where are we on stylesheets?
- Bob; the pdf transform is nearly ready; I've got 2.x stylesheets in Github, and I have to get the new cover page stuff in; I need to know the Github location where your errata changes are in.
- Kris; look at 'helpful links' section on the wiki page; I will probably want to get together with you to talk about keys used for build only, rather than for cover page content.
- Nancy; I had offered to help with builds, so let me know if you need any support.
- Bob; I'll need someone to look over things once I have the new cover stuff in.
- Kris; we might need to do that once we have new tools from Antenna House; they've given us a license for a PDF compare tool.
- Open action items
Eliot: Update the grammar files to fix allowed number of in
Robert: Correct the content model appendix topics for ditavalmeta / ditavalref for the same.
Robert; not yet
Robert: Correct the ditavalmeta section so the example link goes DIRECTLY to the example.
Robert; not yet
- New item: footnote attribute
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201703/msg00026.html (Anderson, 22 March 2017)
Robert; in the langref, the fn element has a stray @, datatype, that is probably a copy-paste error from something in L&T; it doesn't, and the grammar files (without it) are correct, so it just needs to be removed from the definition.
[TC agreed to this ]
ActionItem Robert will fix the spec error listing @datatype as an @ for fn.
8. DITA 2.0 stage one proposals
Reconcile class attributes for shortdesc, linktext, searchtitle
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201705/msg00006.html (Anderson, 3 May 2017)
- Robert; back in DITA 1.0 these were defined twice,once in topic.mod and once in map.mod, with two different class @s. This means that processors have to treat them as if they're two distinct elements. We couldn't fix this because of backwards compatibility issues, but we can for 2.0. I'm suggesting that we switch to just using the topic.mod version.
- Kris; questions, comments?
- Eliot, seems like a good idea
- Robert; I knew it needed to wait for 2.0, but it needed to be proposed.
- Kris; just a question, are there any objections to moving to stage 1 in-progress queue; can anyone take ownership of this?
- Eliot; I'm happy to take this if Robert doesn't want it.
- Robert; thanks.
- Kris; not a hard one to fix.
- Robert; the work is trivial; the hard part is writing up backwards incompatibility issues in the spec.
[moved by Kris, 2nded by Robert, approved by TC.] Robert has opened issue and assigned to Eliot.
9. DITA 2.0 stage two proposals
(Early draft for feedback) Separating technical content from base
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201705/msg00000.html (Bob Thomas)
- Bob; this proposal is a response to the request to separate technical contnct and L&T from core spec. It's fairly straightforward how this would be done. The tech content material is already contained in one piece in architecture spec and one piece in langref. So those pieces need to be removed and put into their own spec. Also, we need to separate the relevant grammar file, but they're also already separate. The main issue is documenting the changes and implications; the new tec content version could be looked at as a plugin. The main difficulty is in dealing with @ definitions.
- Nancy; what about removing the content models? That could be a problem for many users.
- Kris; the stage 2 proposal needs to consider usability and user experience for folks reading the tech content spec.
- Bob; we have to keep that in mind, but short of ihncorporating the base spec, we'll have to take a hit in that area.
- Alan; what's your concern, Kris?
- Kris; the overall experience for folks using technical content spec, if they're looking at it in isolation from looking at the base spec. In an ideal world, we would be able to combine them without delivering them together.
- Robert; it will be different, and change is always hard, but we think the payoff in reducing complexity of base DITA will be worth it.
- Stan; it would be good to put it in front of people and reduce the surprise factor.
- Robert; that means a lot of work, we'd have to have something to put in front of them.
- Bob; re 'problem areas' in this proposal; I need to hear from folks, I have no real conviction one way or another.
- Robert; and this isn't something the TechComm SC should have to answer; it's a broad question. (L&T will face the same issue when it separates also)
- Kris; I think the benefits outweigh issues, but I like Stan's idea of prototyping early to get feedback.
- Bob; the question is really which of these 3 possible solutions do you hate the least? I think the one with lowest usability is cross-publication linking..
- Eliot; I've needed impetus to implement cross-publication linking in D4ST, but this would be a driver.
- Kris; cross-publication linking would affect OASIS rules for what we deliver in what format. It's easy to link OASIS html-to-html, but impossible to do in PDF, and they require that.
- Eliot; we could render pdf links as text and not navigable, or you could have the pdf link to html...
- Bob; I think cross-publication linking is feasible, but we need to kknow what will happen doing it; out of the 3 choices, I think that will serve users the best.
10. Review of stage one (in progress) cards
Project page at the Github repo: https://Github.com/oasis-tcs/dita/projects/2
Redesign how grammar files are structured for delivery
- Robert; this has been discussed; the general goal was to make RNG the focus, and stop worrying about modularity of DTD/XSD, so those become just processing artifacts.
- Nancy; we'd have to provide tools for going to modular DTD from modular RNG.
- Robert; those tools exist; we just have to point to them and maybe give tips on usage. There will always be work to do in moving modular DTDs to modular RNG, but it will have to be done
- Eliot; I'm developing a tool to move modular DTDs into RNG.
- Kris; should we just stop shipping XSD for 2.0? What apps in DITA space use XSD?
- Eliot; XOpus, (now SDL Content Editor? SDL Reach?); also FontoXML, XEditor.
- Mark; FontoXML attends LwD meetings a lot.
- Chris; it won't be easy for them.
- Bob; I've done things with XOpus as a user, and this is not a new problem for them.
- Eliot; with XOpus you have to handcraft XSDs to be as small as possible to use DITA in XSD, so they'd probably be happy to be able to have just one giant xsd file.
- Kris; back to Robert's suggestion that we only ship modular RNG and monolithic DTD/XSD, any other thoughts about implications for following this path?
- Nancy; everyone will have to learn rng...
- Robert; unless we can ship a tool that creates modular DTDs from RNG.
- Chris; DocBook has moved to RNG as canonical, and DTDs as generated files.
- Kris; but they don't have specialization.
- Eliot; if at all possible, we should continue to supply modular DTDs, but not require modular DTDs from anyone.
- Kris; that would soften the curve of moving to RNG.
- Robert; if we don't provide modular DTDs, we'll have a lot of angry users.
- Kris; what tools can handle RNG natively? Only ones I know about are Oxygen and DITA-OT.
- Chris; definitely not XMetal, or Arbortext.
- Kris; we'll have to be very careful about stranding processors.
- Robert; I'll open an issue so we can start tracking this.
12 noon ET close
-- Ms. Nancy Harrison
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]