Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 15 October 2019 uploaded

[Nancy Harrison<nharrison@infobridge-solutions.com>]

        Submitter's message
        ActionItems:  
1. Kris; asap, provide Eliot more info on copy-to proposal and suggestions, not today but tomorrow.
2. Zoe will complete review on proposal #21 by Friday



=================================================
Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 15 October 2019
Recorded by Hancy Harrison
link to agenda for this meeting:	
https://wiki.OASIS-open.org/dita/PreviousAgendas


Attendance:
Robert Anderson, Deb Bissantz, Carsten Brennecke, Bill Burns, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, Carlos Evia, Hancy Harrison, Scott Hudson, Eliot Kimber, Zoe Lawson, Chris Nitchie, Keith Schengili-Roberts, Dawn Stevens, Eric Sirois, Jim Tivy   


Business
========

1. Roll call
        Regrets: Carlos Evia (who nonetheless was on much of the call)


2. Approve minutes from previous business meeting:
        08 October 2019
            https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00077.html (Harrison, 10 October 2019) 
Moved by Kris, 2nd by Bill, approved by TC


3. Announcements:
        None 

  
4.  Action items
[no updates; see agenda for detailed list]
- Kris; please check any items for you and 1. see if they're labeled correctly, 2. try to wrap them up asap


5. DITA 2.0 stage two proposals
        Vote
            #297 Allow example in more places
                https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00066.html (Hudson, 08 October 2019) 

Scott moved 2nd by bill
Voting results:
yes votes:		11 (Robert Anderson, Deb Bissantz, Carsten Brennecke, Bill Burns, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, Hancy Harrison, Scott Hudson, Zoe Lawson, Chris Nitchie, Dawn Stevens)
no votes:		 0
[this is now at stage 3]
- Kris; who are the stage 3 reviewers for this?
[Carsten, Stan]
- Kris; Scott, when you've drafted stage 3, we can check back with Stan and Carsten to make sure they're available then, but we'll ask for other reviewers if they're no longer available, to avoid any delay in making progress.
        Continuing discussion
            None 
        Initial discussion
            #29 Bookmap update revised
                https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00097.html (Eberlein, 14 October 2019) 
- Kris; overview of proposal. this is revision of earlier proposal by Eric, needed to go back after some discussion. primary use cases are [see proposal]. solution required modifying content model of bookmap to allow ditavalref, add mapresources to map domain, also modifying bookmap content map to allow mapresources and amendments. no backwards compat issues, but some migration issues, implementer will have to pay attention to their shells, because ditavalref and map group domain will have to be integrated in shell, if they've removed them, otherwise it will break.
- Zoe; does data-elements-include include mapref?
- Kris; no that's in mapgroup domain.
- Zoe; does it make sense to have mapref in mapresources
- Robert; should be there automatically; topicref is there
[Eliot, Dawn joined]
- Zoe; ok
- Kris; one point brought up by Eliot. made change to example, in fig 2, in example 2, 
- Eliot; a topicref with an href but no key, so it didn't fit
- Kris; so I added outputclass = cover-page
- Eliot; and I'm happy with your fix to that
- Kris; we have other refs to mapresouces containing resource-only data like this; any comments? 
- Eliot; should it have those refs?
- Kris; it think mapresources will be a handy place for those kinds of stuff, and this will be a good standard place to put it, and we may need to add some wording around it to clarify it. if folks want to lookat it and let me know any concerns before next week, that would be a good thing. OK? I will ask, do we really want href in mapresouces? not sure what purpose it serves?
- Robert; I don't know either, equivalent of having href on topicgroup
- Eliot; if don't want a direct ref to map I'm using, rather having mapresource be literal, point to a mapref
- Eliot; no sense to refer to a topic, but it could refer to a submap.
- Scott; agree, could be useful
- Zoe; why no conref?
- Kris; conref is covered by univ-atts, whic I should add to this proposal
- Zoe; it's already there.
- Kris; any more issues, thoughts comments?
[vote next week]

        Questions/Discussion/Early feedback
            None 


6.    DITA 2.0 stage three proposals
        Vote
            #233 Remove copy-to attribute
                https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00090.html (Kimber, 14 October 2019) 

- Kris; even though this was scheduled for a vote, of all of the 2.0 proposals, this seems to have gotten the most concern from users. so we might want to add info to proposal on impact to users and processors. So do we want to hold this a week?
- Eliot; OK - what was the major concern?'
- Robert; what I've been hearing is just 'oh no, I need this, how can you remove this?'
- Eliot; the challenge is that the requirement that copy-to was trying to address was real, but something that the spec can't address.
Kris; I agree that we need to remove copy-to, and the spec can't address these details of content delivery, and processors need to deal with that.  And for this proposal, more than anything else, we want to make sure we can provide a clear statement for what processors do, though definitely not how they do it.  But considering these use cases, people are concerned that if we remove copy-to, processors won't do anything to meet their needs.  We need to make what we state about it in the proposal,  which users do read, as useful and non-scary for users as possible.
- Eliot; if you can specify more about what I added to the example, that would be helpful.
- Kris; I'm happy to provide a detailed review and suggestions
- Eliot; we've already said we need a detailed white paper on this subject.
- Kris; but we also need to be careful about what we say in proposal, so it doesn't really frighten or confuse people.
- Eliot; any time you get into addressing, people get frightened real fast.
- Chris; people use this, so they worry.  We need to say 'talk to your processor people'. since most non-OT processors don't work with copy-to anyway.
- Robert; one suggestion Eliot made, if I set a key, use it for the filename, but that would have major side effects.  We need something that's in between, to tell OT that this file needs to renamed based on the key.
- Eliot; it's a big change
- Chris; in the absence of copy-to, we [at Titania] use metadata; the other thing is, we generate a javscript file that's a lookup table for the ID of the element.
- Eliot; but there are a large number of legacy processing methods that use this, and we don't want to break those; any tool needs to provide a method for controlling how things work on a per/topicref basis.  It's a hard problem; one problem with copy-to is that it made a hard problem seem simpler, but it didn't really make it simpler.
- Kris; with copy-to, we put something in the spec that tried to address a problem that no spec was designed to address, and now people rely on it.  If it goes away, people don't know if processors will address it.
- Robert; it was an easy-to-understand solution before we had keys.
- Eliot; I'll take a shot at writing something more useful
***ActionItem: Kris; asap, provide Eliot more info on copy-to proposal and suggestions, not today but tomorrow.

    Initial discussion
            #278 Remove lockmeta attribute
                https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00100.html (Burns, 14 October 2019)
                    https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00101.html (Anderson, 14 October 2019) 
- Bill; the proposal is to remove lockmeta because processing was never clearly defined, no one seems to be using it, and we don't need it.
- Kris; good summary.  One strange hiccup; Sill sent out proposal with a hyperlink, but when it went to email, it didn't have PDF attached. for some email clients. Please let me know if you did/didn't get a copy
[vote next week]

            #252 Add outputclass to DITAVAL elements
                https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00076.html (Anderson, 10 October 2019) 
- Robert; adding outputclass into ditaval, so you can use it the same way as you would to modify CSS and other such files.
- Kris; this was reviewed by Carsten, Eric, Eliot, Scott. Any questions?
[none, vote next week]

            #164 Redesign hazardstatement
                https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00098.html (Eberlein, 14 October 2019) 
- Kris; this was reviewed by Bill and Deb. Eliot, do you want to hold this till you review?
- Eliot; I reviewed it yesterday, sent you my comments; not much, just a couple of places where it uses href instead of keyref.
- Kris; I'll look at your review comments, if I need to make changes to examples, we'll need to bring it back to TC. I think this was also fairly recent, so it's fairly fresh in folks minds. 
[no one wanted an update overview]
- Kris; the highlight of this is to require that a hazardstatement element have a @type attribute; but it doesn't make sense to have a default value. The proposal will look a little different from some others; I used a map to generate it, so topics in topic ref would resolve, Any questions, objections?
[none, vote next week]

        Early feedback
            None 

7. Review of DITA 2.0 proposal deadlines
     https://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DeadlinesDITA2.0 
[discussion on selected Stage 3 items]
        (Kimber) Resolve inconsistent class values for shortdesc, linktext, searchtitle (https://github.com/oasis-tcs/dita/issues/21)
            05 October 2019 Ready for review (Lawson, Bissantz)
            10 October 2019: Submitted to reviewers (Lawson, Bissantz)
            15 October 2019: Initial discussion by TC
            22 October 2019: TC vote 
- Eliot; I'm still waiting for review comments from Zoe
- Kris; Zoe, can you turn around by Friday?
- Zoe; yes, will do
***ActionItem: Zoe will complete review on proposal #21 by Friday
 
       (Anderson) Remove domains attribute (https://github.com/oasis-tcs/dita/issues/217)
            Due 15 October 2019 
- Robert; I need to delay for one more week.
- Kris; so what date should be listed as sent to reviewers?
- Robert; 10/22
- Kris; do you have reviewers?
- Robert; not sure, don't have them listed
[Carsten, Kris, & Eliot have volunteered to review this]


8.    Volunteer needed
        https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00056.html (Eberlein, 08 October 2019) 
- Kris; any volunteers?  heard off list from Bill, we'll take you up on our offer, with Eliot as backup for when you're not on the call.


9. Approved DITA 2.0 proposals
        Working draft #04
            https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00068.html 
        Tally of approved proposals
            https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00067.html (Eberlein, 09 October 2019) 
- Dawn; we'll be having a scheduled Q&A session at end of DITAEurope, as we did in the spring, and I've put a slot in there for this, will include info from these materials in late session.


10. Time to disband the Learning and training subcommittee
        https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00058.html (Eberlein, 08 October 2019) 
- Kris; L&T was inactive for a very long time, Dawn and Amber tried to re-activate it with no success.
- Dawn; the problem is that not many companies are using it.  So why aren't people using it? 'because it doesn't output to PDF'  But that's because there haven't been enough folks working on it to do the work to make that happen.  There were only 4 of us who were being active; I just don't think the interest is there...
- Kris; the problem is that L&T wasn't developed out of multiple companies to meet their needs, so it was never widely used.  In any case, given the current situation, we need to have a motion and vote on it. That will shut down SC, and people won't be able to join it; we can always re-activate, if we have people who want to do so.   Real issue is: What do we want to do with L&T spec and resources?  We can make it available on a github repo, but then a TC member needs to be willing to be responsible for maintaining it.  And do we have bandwidth to update it for 2.0?
- Carlos; I might do it; both Scriptorium and Easydita, who I' in contact with,  make use of it. 
- Kris; a pity that neither of those firms are in OASIS so that they could be TC members...  So Carlos, you're potentially willing to be maaintainer of the github repo?  Eliot, you had expressed interest, do you have any bandwidth?
- Eliot; interest defintiely, not much bandwidth...
- Kris; if I name you both, then it would be a bit less work for each of you.
[both agreed]
- Kris; I'll investigate what needs to be done.



                https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00001.html (Stevens, 01 October 2019) 


13. Migrating to DITA 2.0 committee note
    Audience
    Starting thoughts on a migration document
        https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/201910/msg00102.html (Lawson, 15 October 2019) 
Kris; we'll put discussion of migration doc at top of agenda for next week.


12 noon ET close 

        
-- Ms. Nancy Harrison

Document Name: DITA TC Meeting Minutes 15 October 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: 2019-10-17 11:39:01