| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 23 April 2019 uploaded
- From: Nancy Harrison<email@example.com>
- To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 05:46:17 +0000 (UTC)
I'm sending out these draft minutes for Tuesday's call. I had been waiting to get a final list of meeting attendance, but I want them to go out before it gets too late, so I'm sending them out knowing the attendance listed is probably not correct, since I didn't join the call till the end of attendance was being taken, and it hasn't yet been posted to the OASIS site. It's recorded it according to who is represented as speaking or being referenced on the call, so if you were on the call and your name isn't there, let me know.
I think the rest of the minutes should be correct. If you see something that isn't, also let me know.
1. Kris will put out something on dita-users about how many people use property tables.
2. Robert will update chunking proposal.
Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 2 April 2019
Recorded by Hancy Harrison
link to agenda for this meeting:
Robert Anderson, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, Carlos Evia, Hancy Harrison, Alan Houser, Eliot Kimber, Tom Magliery, Chris Nitchie, Dawn Stevens, Zoe Lawson
1. Roll call
2. Approve minutes from previous business meeting:
09 April 2019
Not available as of 23 April 2019, 07:45 AM ET
Welcome Zoe Lawson as a voting member, representing Casenet LLC
4. Action items
21 August 2018
Kris & Robert: Perform the best edit of multimedia topics that they can do in time available; due 23 April: UPDATE: 50% completed
- Kris; 50% way thru editing,
11 September 2018
Kris: Review conversation with Joe Pairman, e-mails about metadata, and TC discussion in late 2017/early 2018; summarize to TC: due 09 April Overdue
- Kris; mostly thru with this
13 November 2018
Eliot: Test refactoring of grammar files; due 07 Mary
Spec editors: Finish incorporating changes from DITAweb review; due 09 April COMPLETED
18 December 2018
Eliot: Investigate issue re earningAggregationsTopicrefConstraintMod.xsd; due 07 May
29 January 2019:
Carlos: Set up regularly scheduled calls between DITA 2.0 and LwDITA spec editors; due 26 April
05 March 2019:
Alan: Update DITA 2.0 files for appropriate elements with LwD hint values for @format and create a pull request; due 23 April
Carlos & Alan: Select three element reference topics that exist in both LwDITA and DITA 2.0 for LWDITA and DITA editors to work on; due 09 April
19 March 2019:
Michael Priestley: Propose methodology/syntax for mapping DITA class and outputclass attributes to HTML class attribute -- Need deadline
02 April 2019
Kris: Will create minimal slide deck about DITA 2.0 for the Wednesday PM event COMPLETED
All voting TC members: Look through 1.3 normative statements listed in Nitchie's e-mail: What's missing? What's duplicative? What's nonsensical? How should we mark them up so we can get a clean extraction to build a (non-normative by definition) appendix?
09 April 2019
Minutes not available as of 23 April 2018, 07:45 PM ET
- Kris; Carlos and Alan; selecting 3 topics for editing?
- Carlos; we'll work on this tomorrow
- Alan; yes
- Kris; I'm looking forward to getting regular calls set up between DITA and LwD editors schedules
- Carlos; we'll discuss that tomorrow
5. Report from CMS/DITA NA 2019
- Kris; let's open floor for discussion...
- Deb; a lot of new faces; lot of new people stopped by our booth; had fairly good turnout at my test kitchen presentation, even though it didn't make it into the program.
- Eliot; DITA is starting to reach a point that we got to in early 200's in the XML conference; less about technology, and more about marketing; fewer talks about 'how to use ..' and more about 'how do you use it?', and 'how do you sell it to your team?' It's a sign of the technology maturing.
- Dawn; wrt talks, I put in what gets submitted, so the kinds of presentations that appear have to do with what preentations I get...
- Eliot; but it's still a sign of maturity if that's the kind of presentations that are being submitted.
- Robert; also, as we're between releases, we don't have a lot of big new existing features to talk about.
- Alan; that brings up the DITA registry presentation. The people behind that repository are the same ones who bear the brunt of DITA-OT work. It would be good to see more grass roots participation
- Robert; it's nice that a number of things in the registry come from folks who don't participate in either toolkit work or the TC. At the Weds. afternoon session, someone brought up 3 requests that all sounded reasonable, so I wrote a plugin to do one of those (examplelist in booklists), and it's on the registry now.
- Robert; Nancy suggested to folks that they send suggestions/requests to dita-comment list.
- Kris; but no one knows about that; we need to have a handout with how to send to it at the next conference.
- Dawn; how was the DITA TC table?
- Stan; it was useful, but we need to up our game on signage, From 10 feet waway, we had no signage, and no one could tell it was there.
- Kris; I've already started talking with OASIS about that.
- Stan; people did take the handouts, so for the people we caught, they were enganged, and new people were curious.
- Carlos; we had a nice workflow for awhile. We had soem interested new faces, so it was good where we were placed.
- Tom; if OASIS doesn't want to do signage because of cost, maybe vendors on TC could chip in for fancy signage and stress toys...
- Kris; awesone idea.
- Alan; I told peole our booth was lost in shipping...
- Kris; I'm about 2/3 thru downloading sessions from the app, and analyzing what the sessions covered. There was a significant % that covered metadata/taxonomy.
- Dawn; we're still getting feedback and a high % said that those metadata/taxonomy ones were most useful.
- Alan; what was attendance at conference?
- Dawn; around 300, and 76 had never come to it before.
- Kris; how does that compare with prev years?
- Dawn; it's basically same as Denver (2018), and also same % of new people.
- Kris; will there be an updated website?
- Dawn; yes, in about a week.
- Tom; what was 2.0 session on Weds. like?
- Robert; not as lively as last year, the person with 3 requests and a person who wanted an augmented domain.
- Nancy; one note, though there weren't many peole at my session (which was early a.m. against a long, very interesting-looking session, so not surprising), a number of people were intereseted in it during the Weds. session.
- Eric; bookmap session went well; a number of questions, Someone [Simon Bate from Scriptorium} was interested in map resources, and satisfied with my response.
- Kris; for Weds. afternoon session I did a rudimentary slide deck,
- Robert; there were some questions about backwards compatibility in 2.0; it prompted Zoe to come up and volunteer to work on that.
- Kris; people wanted a list of what's being removed in 2.0, so they can start future-proofing their content. Would be a good idea for us to put out a list.
- Deb; with the caveat that this is still years out so they shouldn't start to panic yet...
- Tom; thx for the re-cap.
6. DITA 2.0 stage two proposals
Request for feedback:
Issue #123: Properties table
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201904/msg00017.html (Anderson, 23 April 2019)
- Robert; idea came from Jang, gen'l usability issue is in ref topics you can put in properties table, but it's only allowed as a child of refbody, not in any other context, e.g., in other areas where you could put a simpletable or regular table. Jang waid we shuold be able to put this anywhere. we could make a fairly simple change and allow them to show up in other places, or turn it into a domain element and amke a technically backwards incompatible change that would change where property tables can be used, which would mean adjustments to grammar files. Any thoughts?
- Dawn; in my clients, they're not used much; I generally recommend they use just a table, rather than including such a specialized table.
- Kris; that's the same reason I've advocated people not use it; people create a ref topic and then want to change it to a concept, or they want to reuse the table somewhere outside of a refbody. That's hard if they're using property tables. It would be nice to know about usage... any gen'l comments about your or your clients implementations?
- Tom; does silence mean no one is using it?
- Robert; if no one is using it, it's not worth going beyond a simple fix.
- Kris; it's worth throwing out a question on dita-users, on how many use property tables.
***ActionItem Kris will put out something on dita-users about how many people use property tables.
- Kris; Robert; do you want any other info, or should we put it on hold and wait to see how many people answer?
[on hold pending more info on usage]
7. DITA 2.0 stage three proposals
Issue #105: Simplify chunking
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201904/msg00016.html (Anderson, 23 April 2019)
Robert; I made changes based on feedback from Kris, Stan, and Eliot. Idea is to make chunking easier for everyone. The tokens used to control chunking are too complex and hard to use; they try to manage too much. The revised proposal limits @ to 2 values; 'split' and 'combine'. Wording is tricky because can't be described in terms of toolkit or output files - it talks about 'documents' - but simpler than it was. I made a change based on Chris's review about linking; there are some edge cases wrt linking which I've addressed, but I don't know if we should put some of the info in the topic somewhere else...
- Kris; are you talking about the section on 'impact of chunking on ... linking'?
- Chris; this is important if you think carefully about implications of chunking on linking; the right way seems obvious, but we need new rules to go with it, we need a white paper.
- Robert; you do have to think about it carefully and know a great deal about DITA, and then it's obvious. Some cases aren't straightforward, it's an odd fit and I don't know where it should go.
- Eliot; I agree with Chris; the entire discussion is non-normative but important. In XSLT, they have this stuff in a extended example in an otherwise normative section.
- Chris; I agree; we should turn it into an extended example.
- Robert; I'm not sure how many issues are covered by the examples, but I could rewrite them to include more.
- Kris; that might help people come to the conclusion 'there's only one good answer.'
- Robert; I'll do that today, while it's fresh in my mind..
- Kris; I can help later in the week, on Friday.
- Kris; do we want a revised stage 3 proposal before voting on this?
- Nancy; I would like that.
- Robert; since this will be discourse text, nothing in normative text will change.
- Chris; I didn't have a strong objection.
- Robert; but I think you were right to question it; I'd rather have it in examples making sense.
- Eliot; if it were just one of the examples, it would work pretty well.
- Robert; I'll aim for that.
***ActionItem: Robert will update chunking proposal.
8. Review of DITA 2.0 proposal deadlines
- Kris; copy-to review, Robert?
- Robert; will get to that
- Kris; Chris; any idea of 'loosen attribute rules?
- Chris; maybe June? not sure
- Kris; what about bookmap?
- Eric; based on discussions, other things will need to be added besides the ones we originally agreed on.
- Kris; maybe our strategy should be just the changes that are already there, if we need more, we'll put it in later. Let's put a stake in the ground.
- Eric; I could shoot for end of May..
- Kris; Eliot, your stage 3 proposals? 21 and 34?
- Eliot; Those should be done, I think, but maybe I didn't put them in right place? I'll get them done by the 30th.
OASIS has agreed to build actual style specifications, with our help
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201903/msg00012.html (Eberlein, 04 March 2019)
Updates on committee note:
Now runs on DITA-OT 3.3 (both PDF and HTML5)
Update on spec:
Now runs on DITA-OT 3.3
OASIS is willing to minimize differences between specifications and committee notes
Latest: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201904/msg00004.html (Paul Knight, 02 April 2019)
[waiting on information from OASIS]
10. Content of the Technical Content package for DITA 2.0
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201904/msg00000.html (Harrison, 02 April 2019)
More info from Harrison
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201904/msg00002.html (Harrison on 28 March, forwarded by Eberlein on 02 April 2019)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201904/msg00003.html (Harrison on 28 March, forwarded by Eberlein on 02 April 2019)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201904/msg00010.html (Harrison, 08 April 2019)
[hold till next week]
11. Continuing item: Proposed review of DITA 2.0 elements to LwDITA components
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201902/msg00042.html (Evia, 09 February 2019)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201902/msg00047.html (Eberlein, 12 February 2019)
On hold until LwDITA spec and DITA 2.0 spec editors collaboratively edit three topics
[still on hold]
12 noon ET close
-- Ms. Nancy Harrison
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]