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: Re: [dita] Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 24 July 2018 uploaded

Hi folks - I read TJ's interview with Carlos and I shared it with staff and the TAB. Also tweeted it and posted a pointer on LinkedIn. I found it fascinating because Tom's questions gave the view from outside.Â

Carlos, thanks very much in particular for your comments on OASIS. I love "I promise there is nothing aristocratic or elitist about OASIS." I guess that means I'm not in line to get a "Sir" title <grin>Â


On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 10:48 PM, Nancy Harrison <nharrison@infobridge-solutions.com> wrote:
Submitter's message
No new items

Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 24 July 2018
Recorded by Nancy Harrison
link to agenda for this meeting:

Carsten Brennecke, Bill Burns, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, Maria Essig, Carlos Evia, Dick Hamilton, Nancy Harrison, Scott Hudson, Eliot Kimber, Tom Magliery, Keith Schengili-Roberts, Eric Sirois, Dawn Stevens, Bob Thomas, Jim Tivy, Don Day, Karthikeyan Rengasamy

1. Roll call
Regrets: Robert Anderson, Deb Bissantz, Alan Hauser, Chris Nitchie

2. Approve minutes from previous business meeting:
10 June 2018:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/email/archives/201807/msg00032.html (Magliery, 10 July 2018)
moved by Kris, seconded by Bob, approved by TC

3. Announcements:
New TC members: None

4. Action items
26 June 2018:
Robert: Review OASIS guidelines about normative statements and present at a meeting
03 July 2018
Eric: Send stage one proposal to list about Stefan Eike's e-mail to DITA comment (COMPLETED)

5. DITA Europe 2018
Call for speakers ends tomorrow
Who is planning to go?
Kris; just wanted to make sure everyone knows about deadlines.

6. Balisage 2018 Symposium on Markup Vocabulary Ecosystems
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201807/msg00047.html (Eberlein, 24 July 2018)
- Kris; I'm going; forwarded email from Tommie Usdin; I'd like to hear about anything folks think I should cover.
- Tom; given that the mail came from Tommie, I'm surprised she doesn't already have this info
- Kris; Keith, if you have slides on DITA usage and adoption material, that would be useful.
- Keith; I can send out most recent usage by industry sector, and size of companies that are using DITA; I'll update what I have and send it to you. I think it's up to 733 firms.
- Kris; that info would be awesome
- Bob; I think you should talk about using inheritance to simplify rendering in XML.
- Kris; I will certainly do that. Eliot, any thoughts?
- Eliot; it's definitely a very techie conference, but very friendly, everyone interested in hearing new stuff, maybe 100 people at most.

7. Tom Johnson interview with Carlos Evia
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201807/msg00043.html (Eberlein, 24 July 2018)
- Kris; when was this published?
- Carlos; yesterday
- Kris; I want folks to take a look at this. Tom''s questions reveal certain perceptions.
- Carlos; I want to acknowledge that you helped me come up with speaking points. He doesn't get the difference between DITA the standard and DITA tools. Most questions were about OASIS and the standard.
- Kris; just to get more background; see TJs question about OASIS/aristocracy.
- Nancy; wrt Carlos's comment on OASIS being 'open'; it is, but for members, which is >$300... Carlos, I thought you gave very good answers.
- Kris; I was a bit surprised that DITA was so polarized
- Carlos; you have to look at his ommunity; at one point he started being enthusiastic about DITA, but he was confusing DITA with Oxygen, then he decided it was terrible based on comments from Mark Baker (who may have been commenting on Oxygen).
- Tom; I often deal with customers who can't separate technology from tools. For example, 'I hate Xmetal' because of some limitation of the standardd, or of DITA-OT. Users often blur line between DITA, and DITA-OT, and tools (authoring tool, CMS, etc.); it becomes especially a problem when upgrading to new release of any one of those.
- Bob; people operate from hueristics; don't look any deeper.

8. DITA 2.0 stage one proposals
Continuing discussion
Initial discussion
amendment element changes in bookmap
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201807/msg00045.html (Sirois, 24 July 2018)
- Eric; originally was a comment from Stefan Eike, wrt location of current amendments element being a direct child of backmatter, but its content and behavior make it a better child of booklists; so his suggestion was to move it from backmatter -> booklists.
- Kris; what are the semantics of amendments?
- Eric; they're processed just like other booklist components. it's really just a trigger for processing.
- Kris; so your proposal?
- Eric; moving it from being direct child of backmatter to child of booklists (which is a child of backmatter).
- Kris; Eric suggests that this be incorporated into his stage 2 proposal for bookmap, any objections?
- Kris; what's your ETA for having the bookmap proposal to TC?
- Eric; couple of weeks from now, because there were some changes to proposal (#29) and some amendments that need to happen, so I was waiting on this one. wrt DTD changes, those are done, I just need to refactor proposal.
- Kris; so what's your ETA date on this?
- Eric; Aaugust 14th

9. NEW: Breaking 'Technical Content' specializations into two groups
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201807/msg00027.html (Nitchie, 10 July 2018)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201807/msg00029.html (Burns, 10 July 2018)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201807/msg00033.html (Thomas, 10 July 2018)
- Kris; we don't usually discuss items when the original proposer isn't on call (Chris), but there's been discussion and some resolution on this.
- Bob; I do have some quibbles, do we mean to change DTD? Also, troubleshooting isn't a domain. And there are already some problems with programming domain; the current one doesn't accommodate current state of programming, hasn't changed much since original 15 years ago.
- Nancy, I'm inclined to separate out just programming, software, and UI domains; I think all the rest are usuable in genn'l context.
- Tom; yeah, I lean towards Nancy's model as well.
- Kris; there are 2 things here;
1. how do we split things into packages, grammar files, etc.?
2. the bigger issue is "what goes in the default doc shells?"
So when we think of re-factoring, we have to consider OOTB OASIS doc shells.
- Bob; the real problem is the degree of difficulty an average user has in configuring doc shells; otherwise, we could think of it as 'core' and standard library.
- Kris; early in 1.2 release, some TC members wanted a 'shell configurator' to enable easy shell configurations. but it wasn't something we could do within the OASIS model.
- Bob; it exposes a weakness of the ecosystem; if we try to use packaging to address tool problems, that's a problem.
- Kris; it's also an educational problem; people want DITA to be like Word or Framemaker, and it's not.
- Tom; it's a whole rampup of XML education to get there, and most users don't need that.
- Kris; we'll eventually have to work out whether breaking techcomm would add much complexity.
- Nancy; it might add complexity for current users, but it would probably reduce it for new users, just by having less elements in the basic techcomm package, which is used by many organizations.
- Kris; also, are there elements in techcomm that should be added to base? e.g. glossary?
- Eliot; I'd agree witht that
- Bob; probably abbreviation domain as well.
- Tom; when I started w/DITA, the thinking was that 'things in base are more likely to be used as basis for specialization', rather than as is, and techcomm elements more likely to be used as is.
- Kris; from that perspective, glossary makes sense to be in techcomm , and what about hazard statements, and subjectscheme? Does it make sense to have those in the base, or should they be pulled out?
- Tom; maybe we should be crafting all of these questions to address as a whole for 2.0.
- Kris; I want everyone to look at all of these domains and think about where they should go.
- Nancy; I thing subjectscheme does go in base, it's meant for metadata use in any context.
- Tom; I don't think that whether something is a specialization or not should have implications for what package it's in.

10. New name for 'Technical content' package
Latest e-mail:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201807/msg00028.html (Thomas, 10 July 2018)
- Kris; assuming we keep one large package, we have a number of suggestions.
- Bob; i think folks are thinking that 'tech communications' is all about software and programming, but it's not; it includes a lot more. STC defines it as follows:
"Technical communication is a broad field and includes any form of communication that exhibits one or more of the following characteristics:
1. Communicating about technical or specialized topics, such as computer applications, medical procedures, or environmental regulations.
2. Communicating by using technology, such as web pages, help files, or social media sites.
3. Providing instructions about how to do something, regardless of how technical the task is or even if technology is used to create or distribute that communication."
- Tom; I liked that name even before Bob's mail.
- Scott; I did too.
- Kris; me too; any objections?
- Don; just want to toss in a definition of 'professional communications'
- Tom; do you have any info about that?
- Don; not really; does Dawn have info on it?
- Carlos; VA Tech has a course on 'Prof. Comm.'; it focuses on oral communication within the workplace.
- Tom; from Wikipedia; "prof. comm, encompasses oral, written, visual, and digital communication within a workplace context"; seems like it's important that it's taking place in the workplace.
- Kris; I'm glad it's been brought up, but might make the name too long, and too broad.
- Don; but do we make it not broad enough by using 'tech. comm'?
- Bob; I think 'prof. comm.' is too broad.
- Kris; I think STC definition is appropriate; I don't think we need to worry about excluding people.
- Eric; there's a whole domain of people doing what they consider to be tech or prof writers, who don't know anything about markup.
- Don; just trying to broaden the way it might be described to include broader audiences.
- Kris; appreciate that, but don't know if that's who we're targeting for techcomm.
- Karthikeyan; we use DITA for marketing comm, could this be applied to marketing as well?
- Eliot; could be
- Nancy; do we want to revisit this completely, base and general?
- Bob; even if marketing is using this, it isn't really appropriate to call it out specifically.
- Kris; my clients who use DITA for mktg are using stuff akin to LwD plus some specializations of base; they don't use anything from techcomm.
- Karthikeyan; it depends on industry content.
[to be continued]

12 noon ET close

-- Ms. Nancy Harrison
Document Name: DITA TC Meeting Minutes 24 July 2018

No description provided.
Download Latest Revision
Public Download Link

Submitter: Ms. Nancy Harrison
Group: OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC
Folder: Meeting Notes
Date submitted: 2018-07-25 19:48:24



Looking forward toÂBorderless Cyber 20183-5 Oct, Washington, D.C.
Organized by The World Bank, OASIS, and Georgetown University

Chet Ensign
Chief Technical Community Steward
OASIS: Advancing open standards for the information society

Primary: +1 973-996-2298
Mobile: +1 201-341-1393Â

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