Re: [dita] Summary: Status of review of the DITA2.0/LwDITA intersection topics

[Alan Houser <arh@groupwellesley.com>]

Thanks, Kris. Dispatching the DITAweb comments was obviously a substantial amount of effort.

Just to run a couple of items up the flagpole --

- The use case for <ph> differs substantially between DITA and Lightweight DITA. In DITA, <ph> is clearly a basis for specialization. OTOH, specialization is not a priority for Lightweight DITA 1.0, and <ph> is much more likely to be used as a generic semantic wrapper, for filtering or other purposes (or, in both specs, as a conref container). We may want to consider conditional processing on <shortdesc> content between the two specs (only for <ph>), or punt on <shortdesc> reuse between the specs for <ph>.

- As I author topics for the LwDITA spec, I find the "Formatting Expectations/Processing Expectations" distinction to be more tedious than I anticipated. "Formatting" _is_ "Processing". As I write LwDITA spec content, I'm not assuming content will be rendered as text, which further clouds the distinction. (I expect audio and machine consumption will be increasingly popular use cases).

Looking forward to our discussion Monday and beyond.

-Alan

On 1/26/19 8:40 AM, Kristen James Eberlein wrote:

Remember the DITAweb review that was run in October 2018? I've spent about 20 hours this work going through the DITAweb review, resolving what I can, and compiling a list of items that still need resolution.

Here's a summary:

1. Short descriptions: 10 topics need discussion. I've set up a meeting for noon - 1 PM ET on Monday, 28 January 2019; ping me if you want an invitation. Currently, the attendees will be me, Robert, Carlos, and Alan. Attached is an HTML summary of the comments that we'll begin with.
   
2. Examples: Lots of comments here
1. We need to standardize the introductory paragraphs that precede the code blocks. We need to decide what is the best approach, and whether we will identify a few patterns that can be used, or a single pattern.
2. Concern that some of the examples are too US-centric or inaccessible to ESL readers, for example, a reference to Rotten Tomatoes and "How to purchase SuperWidgets from the warehouse." We need to enhance our guidelines for example.
3. Suggestions of multiple additional examples. We need to review our existing guidelines for examples and see what they say. My gut sense is that many of the proposed examples are too complex and do not belong in element reference topics.

Two topics need to be reworked and reviewed: <fn> and <ph>. Ughhh ...

--
Best,
Kris

Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
www.eberleinconsulting.com
+1 919 622-1501; kriseberlein (skype)

-- 
Alan Houser
Group Wellesley, Inc.
Consultant and Trainer, Technical Publishing
arh on Twitter
412-450-0532