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: Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 2 July 2019 uploaded


Submitter's message
ActionItems:
1. Kris will look at existing content, see what we say, and bring it back with her suggestion for what to say, including a suggestion for location of normative language around marprefs and rel tables.
2. Kris will do initial rework on section 9.3.2.4 (topicgroup) and bring back to TC.
3. Zoe will forward a proposal on respecializing imagemap to TC.


=================================================
Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 2 July 2019
Recorded by Hancy Harrison
link to agenda for this meeting:
https://wiki.OASIS-open.org/dita/PreviousAgendas


Attendance:
Robert Anderson, Deb Bissantz, Bill Burns, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, Hancy Harrison, Eliot Kimber, Zoe Lawson, Tom Magliery, Keith Schengili-Roberts, Dawn Stevens


Business
========

1. Roll call
Regrets: Alan Houser, Carlos Evia, Carsten Brennecke, Chris Nitchie


2. Approve minutes from previous business meeting:
18 June 2019
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201906/msg00068.html (Bissantz, 19 June 2019)
Moved by Kris, 2nd by Nancy, approved by TC


3. Announcements:
New TC members: Jaquie Samuels and Graydon Saunders from Precision Content


4. Action items
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
13 November 2018
Eliot: Test refactoring of grammar files; due end of June
18 December 2018
Eliot: Investigate issue re LearningAggregationsTopicrefConstraintMod.xsd; due end of June
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
09 April 2019
Eliot: Does SVG zip file need to be in techcomm grammar folder?
- due date changed to Aug 15
Kris and Tom: Finish up any discussion about examples in ArchSpec files
- Kris and Tom will confer to see if this is still open.
Nancy: Review LwDITA e-mail threads; create a Wiki page to track items, so that we can ensure that all items have been discussed and resolved
- Nancy will post the location of the page to the TC list, and Kris will add a link to the front page wiki.
30 April 2019
Kris: Request OASIS Open repository for tools/scripts to aid users in moving to DITA 2.0
- Kris; we need maintainers, etc., for this.
07 May 2019
Robert: Respond to Chris P on dita-comment (COMPLETED)
28 May 2019
Kris and Robert: Revise content and run it by Eliot (Draft-comment in spec WD03, section 3.3.3, page 37)
- everyone in TC should be looking at these.
Robert: Take an initial look at fixing this (Draft-comment in spec WD03, section 3.4.4, page 52)
Chris: Look at draft-comment in spec WD03, section 8.2.2.19, page 210
18 June 2019
Kris: Send Deb attendance for the meeting (COMPLETED)
Kris: Cancel meeting for 25 June 2019 (COMPLETED)
Kris: Send out multimedia domain PDF (COMPLETED)
Kris: Resubmit stage two proposal for indexing changes and change indexterm-base to index-base (COMPLETED)
Robert: Answer Chris P's latest comment on dita-users (COMPLETED)
Robert: Set up submodule for DITA for TechComm repository
Robert: Work on remaining stylesheet issues; see https://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/stylesheetBacklog


5. DITAweb review of multimedia domain topics
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201906/msg00067.html (Eberlein, 19 June 2019)
DITAweb status?
- Kris; Alan has been pushing Congility to update their DITAWeb server to a more recent version, then we'll start review.


6. Draft comments in latest working draft from TC attention
We will review and discuss them, starting with page 258
Working draft 04: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201906/msg00000.html

a. - this is the comment on p 258, section 9.3.2.3, wrt processing expectations for mapref; do we need normative statements?
- Kris; this is the only place in the spec where we talk about what x should do wrt rel. tables in a child map.
- Eliot; we do need mormative statements; we have edge cases, e.g. branch filtering on reltables. If you have a reltable inside a filtered branch. you need to account for that in any statements we do make.
- Kris; does anyone think we shouldn't make normative statements about hierarchies and how reltables work?
[no response, so TC agrees that normative statement is needed.]
- Eliot; I'd expect this to be covered somewhere in arch spec around maps.
- Kris; I added this comment precisely because I don't think it is covered there.
- Robert; I don't think it covers it either, and it needs content; so we need a normative statement. But it shouldn't be in this topic; it's a much more general issue.
- Eliot; I agree
- Kris; the point of reviewing it is to see what needs to be said, and where.
- Tom; is there a different place in the PDF where we should look right now?
- Robert; I don't think we cover this in the abstract sense
- Kris; you could check TOC, and we could discuss where we know it's not; e.g. in the overview of DITA w/ditamaps, all that is non-normative.
- Kris; I don't think we have anything about what maps do with mapref & reltables.
- Tom; is there a place where this content should fit?
- Kris; not in DITA markup, maybe in map processing section.
- Tom; Section 3 "Overview of DITA" is mostly non-normative, maybe a description should be there, and any normataive stuff in 4.
- Eliot; in the 1.3 spec, there's an example in section 2.2.2 (DITA maps), but that's obviously not normative.
- Kris; DITA map examples are now 3.4.5, all non-normative.
- Eliot; so the behavior in this example needs to be described in a normative section.
- Kris; can anyone else look at this as well?
- Deb; I can
- Kris; this is exactly what we're trying to do; get a handle on where we have useful info, but in the wrong place, that should be somewhere else. We may also have it in reltable topic; we NEED it in arch topice.
***ActionItem: Kris will look at existing content, see what we say, and bring it back with her suggestion for what to say, including a suggestion for location of normative language around marprefs and rel tables.

b. next comment is p. 259, section 9.3.2.4, 'topicgroup'
- Eliot; I'd like this statement to be a ilttle more definitive, titles in topicgroups are never intended for presentation, and shouldn't be treated the way they're treated in topicheads.
- Kris; so does saying it has no defined purpose convey that?
- Tom; we could add 'and should not be used for presentation.'
- Eliot; also, we're extending the title-alt mechanism, so this shouldn't be the only choice...
- Kris; what stage is that proposal? stage 3??
- Eliot; I think so... this is a weird situation; it didn't originally allow the title element; now that it does, we need to explain its limitations.
- Kris; we're also making normative statements about processing expectations.
- Eliot; those might cover it... I think that something labeled 'processing expectations' should never be normative, anything normative should be a 'processing requirement.'
- Kris; we've had this discussion before; the outcome was that anything having to do with formatting would go in a appendix.
- Eliot; so i'd recommend that this statement should be in the appendix; it's really a rendering issue, not a processing issue
- Kris; so should we change the title for this section to 'rendering expectations'?
- Eliot; yes
- Tom; but that still has same issue; your report of titles would still not be able to be rendered... I don't think there should be a normative statement on this at all; it depends on what you're doing with the navtitle. Really, it would be more usage information, rather than expectations.
- Eliot; yeah, another thing is that the semantic of topicgroup is that it doesn't contribute to navigation hierachy in map, so not used in normal rendering.
- Kris; it relates to overarching statements about map processing; this is only place in spec where we talk about topicgroup.
- Tom; and any overarching discussion should be in arch spec.
- Kris; so, we have a normative statement, because it was in 1.2 and 1.3; when we introduced navtitle, there was no way to keep it out of topicgroup.
- Tom; this description should give that sense of topicgroup, that it groups topics without affecting hierarchy.
- Eliot; that statement is in 1.3 element ref for topicgroup, in section 3.3.2.4.
- Kris; so we need to bring it back into the shordesc of this topic as well. If we need to make a normative statement, it should be in 'rendering expectations', and it should be qualified, e.g.'for publication of document with a hierarchy this will be ignored by processor' We'll need to flag this topic for extra review.
- Eliot; loking thru 1.3 spec, in 2.4 navigation, there's an entry describing this expectation for topicgroups.
- Kris; that item might be also a good candidate for moving into a group of topics about maps and map hierarchy.
***ActionItem: Kris will do initial rework on this topic and bring back to TC.

c. section 9.3.2.5 'topichead']
- Kris; Eliot, your thoughts on this?
- Eliot; topicgroup is unique, it's the only form of topicref with behavior at odds with other topicref elements, otoh, topichead has similar behavior to topicref.
- Tom; but it took me a really long time to figure out the difference between topichead and topicgroup; kind of sounded like the same thing.
- Kris; I haven't seen that specific confusion, though I've seen that people couldn't understand what topicgroup could be used for.
- Eliot; the only other place with special behavior for topichead was chunking in 1.2; there was a special combination of topichead and chunking, but that was to work around DITA-OT issues.
- Tom; it seems like this, as well as topicgroup, needs mention in a higher level discussion about map rendering, the items should go together, and the shortdescs for these 2 elements should be evaluated together.
- Kris; I'm happy to try to do that. it also underscores that it's a good idea, when we have architectural content about maps, map processing, teltables, etc, that we review architecture content with element ref content for those elements.
- Kris; wrt this comment, does it need a normative statement?
- Eliot; not really, because it acts just like a topicref that way, so I don't think it needs one.
- Kris; we can say we don't want to make a normative statement here, but we need to review this topic. Robert and I are trying to be very careful about not using should, must, may in any non-normative context. So that will trigger some of our discussions.



7. DITA 2.0 stage two proposals
Vote
a. #253: Indexing changes
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201906/msg00053.html (Eberlein, 14 June 2019)

- Kris; moved to bring #253 to stage 3, Robert 2nd
Voting Results:
yes votes: 11 (Robert Anderson, Deb Bissantz, Bill Burns, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, Hancy Harrison, Eliot Kimber, Zoe Lawson, Tom Magliery, Keith Schengili-Roberts, Dawn Stevens)
no votes: 0
- For stage 3, Dawn, Bill, and Eliot will review.

b. #217: Removing domains attribute / reworking attribute specializations
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201906/msg00057.html (Anderson, 14 June 2019)

- Robert moved to bring it to stage 3, Bill 2nd
Voting Results:
yes votes: 11 (Robert Anderson, Deb Bissantz, Bill Burns, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, Hancy Harrison, Eliot Kimber, Zoe Lawson, Tom Magliery, Keith Schengili-Roberts, Dawn Stevens)
no votes: 0
- for stage 3, Eliot and Tom will review.


8. DITA 2.0 stage one proposals
Allow in same locations as

https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201906/msg00026.html (Hudson, 10 June 2019)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201906/msg00027.html (Kimber, 10 June 2019)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201906/msg00028.html (Eberlein, 10 June 2019)
Additional e-mails ...
- [On hold until Scott Hudson returns from vacation]


9. Review of DITA 2.0 proposal deadlines
https://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DeadlinesDITA2.0
- Keith; proposal #107, move deadline to end of July
- proposal #29; Keith will ping Eric on this
- Eliot; proposal #33, move deadline to mid-August for all deadlines



Other:
- Zoe; what about my question about putting an imagemap in a figure?
- Kris; I think it would be a good idea to re specialize it from something like 'div' instead of 'fig' so that it can be nested.
- Eliot; I like the idea
- Zoe; I'm willing to create a proposal, but not sure I know enough to actually implement it all by myself.
- Eliot; if it's just changing the specialization base from fig to div, should be pretty straightforwad.
- Kris; Zoe, if you want, put forth a proposal; though to me, div seems a bit strange, just like fig.
- Eliot; but div is just a generic container, and it would get around Zoe's problem.
***ActionItem: Zoe will forward a proposal on this to TC.


11:37 noon ET close



-- Ms. Nancy Harrison
Document Name: DITA TC Meeting Minutes 2 July 2019

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: 2019-07-03 03:13:43



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