|
And here is the meeting attendance:
- Zoe Lawson
- Dawn Stevens
- Kris Eberlein
- Bill Burns
- Robert Anderson
- Stan Doherty
- Nancy Harrison
- Alan Houser
- Eliot Kimber
- Eric Sirois
- Tom Magliery
- Chris Nitchie
- Carsten Brennecke
- Scott Hudson
- Carlos Evia
- Deb Bissantz
- Joyce Lam
- Jim Tivy
Best,
Kris
Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
www.eberleinconsulting.com
+1 919 622-1501; kriseberlein (skype)
On 4/26/2019 1:46 AM, Nancy Harrison
wrote:
Submitter's message
Hi,
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.
Nancy
ActionItems:
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:
https://wiki.OASIS-open.org/dita/PreviousAgendas
Attendance:
Robert Anderson, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, Carlos Evia, Hancy
Harrison, Alan Houser, Eliot Kimber, Tom Magliery, Chris Nitchie,
Dawn Stevens, Zoe Lawson
Business
========
1. Roll call
Regrets: none
2. Approve minutes from previous business meeting:
09 April 2019
Not available as of 23 April 2019, 07:45 AM ET
3. Announcements:
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
Vote
None
Continuing discussion
None
Initial discussion
None
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
Vote
None
Continuing discussion
None
Initial discussion
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
https://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DeadlinesDITA2.0
- 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.
9. Stylesheets
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
|