dita message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 13 October 2020 uploaded
- From: Nancy Harrison<nharrison@infobridge-solutions.com>
- To: <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2020 01:13:58 +0000 (UTC)
Submitter's message
ActionItems:
1. Eric will give Eliot feedback on #33 'remove copy-to'
2. Dawn will update proposal #316 "Diagnostics element" to resolve difference between spec description and grammar files. (both stage 2 and stage 3).
=================================================
Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 13 October 2020
Recorded by Hancy Harrison
link to agenda for this meeting:
https://wiki.OASIS-open.org/dita/PreviousAgendas
Attendance:
Deb Bissantz, Carsten Brennecke, Kris Eberlein, Nancy Harrison, Scott Hudson, Gershon Joseph, Eliot Kimber, Zoe Lawson, Chris Nitchie, Keith Schengili-Roberts, Eric Sirois, Dawn Stevens, Frank Wegmann
Business
========
1. Roll call
Regrets: Robert Anderson, Carlos Evia
2. Approve minutes from previous business meeting:
06 October 2020
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202010/msg00016.html (Bissantz, 06 October 2020)
moved by Kris, 2nd by Nancy, approved by TC
3. Announcements - none
4. Action items
[updates only, see agenda for complete list]
15 September 2020
Kris or Robert: Respond to Radu's e-mail on dita-comment; update source COMPLETED
06 October 2020:
Kris: Correct stage 3 proposal for issue #316 COMPLETED
Nancy: Upload minutes (taken by Deb Bissantz) to Kavi
- Kris; Nancy, I gave you the above item
- Nancy; it's already done.
5. Check-in: How are people doing in this difficult time? How is your state/country doing?
[no official business discussed]
6. Report back from Adobe DITA World 2020
- Kris; Dawn and Keith presented, also I thought some other TC members might have attended? any thoughts or comments? I missed the first few minutes of Dawn's seesion, but really liked the rest.
- Dawn; it was just a fluff piece, but I hope it helped folks get a sense of things; it was about needing to have a story, if you wnat to make big changes to your process, e.g. introducing structure and/or DITA to your content creation process. But the story can be different depending on how you place the characters, e.g., difference in perception of the 'wicked witch' between that character in 'Wizard of Oz' vs. in 'Wicked.' So, how do you position DITA in your story? protagonist? antagonist? quirky sidekick? incidental character? And how does that change how you tell your story; you need to make sure your story reflects that.
- Kris; i wouldn't characterize it as a fluff piece; people often don't think about that; DITA isn't the saem in every implementation.
- Zoe; doesn't sound fluffy to me either.
- Kris; Keith, how di your presentation go?
- Keith; I believe it went quite well; at leastm, the Q&A kept me there for another 1/2 hour afterwards. I talked about who is using structured content, including DITA; I have a count of 756 companies known to be using DITA, with a sector breakdown; over 1/4 are, not surprisingly, in computer sector. but there's also a large amount in the 'other' sector; i.e., the one made up of companies in sectors that each individually make up <1%. Those companies using DITA the most are either very large (>500 people and >$100M/year) so mostly either larger firms, or ???. Also, there seem to be a lot less tech writer jobs out there, in many cases they seem to be replaced by jobs with other classifications, such as content strategist, information architect, etc. So people are putting more attention into structuring their content than they were before. Also, DITA seems to be towards, but not at, the end of its 'early majority' phase, in a few years it will be entering 'late majority' phase.
- Nancy; what does 'majority' mean in this context?
- Keith; it relates to the bell curve of adoption.
- Kris; I did a session, a retrospective on where DITA is at, what we're doing for 2.0 and LwD. It's a challenge to be in the last slot at a conference, but I think it went OK. Were there any other TC members at DITA World?
[apparently none]
- Kris; I also heard some comments from other folks attending about DITA-OT. One seesion was 'beyond the DITA-OT'; it was about using Type5 in Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) to get output without going thru DITA-OT. Of course, AEM itself depends on DITA-OT for pre-processing... Conference said it had over 5K registered, though many didn't attend but just watched the recordings.
- Dawn; we're in a situation with ConVEx, DITA World, and Lavacon in 2 weeks, all stacked up in a way we're usually not, and all virtual, where folks are tired of attending conferences, especially virtual conferences...
- Kris; so if any of us have any suggestions on how to make virtual conferences more useful for vendors/sponsors, we should definitely let Dawn or other conference organizers know...
7. Review of DITA 2.0 proposal deadlines
https://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DeadlinesDITA2.0
[updates only; see above link for complate list]
Stage two
(Kimber) Deprecate or remove copy-to attribute (https://github.com/oasis-tcs/dita/issues/33)
(./) Due 05 October 2019
(./) 08 October 2019: Initial discussion by TC
(./) 22 August 2020: Revised version to TC
(./) 15 September 2020: TC discussion of revised version
(./) 03 October 2020: New proposal to reviewers (Sirois, Stevens)
12 October 2020: Reviewers return feedback
- Kris; Eliot, did you get feedback?
- Eliot; feedback from Dawn, but not from either you or Eric
- Eric; I'll get it to you tomorrow.
- Kris; if so, Eliot, when can you turn it around?
- Eliot; pretty quick
- Kris; so next Monday 10/19, for new proposal from you?
- Eliot; sure
***ActionItem: Eric will give Eliot feedback on #33 'remove copy-to'
(Eberlein) New element for key text (https://github.com/oasis-tcs/dita/issues/345)
?: Proposal to reviewers (Chris, Carsten)
?: Initial TC discussion
?: TC vote
- Kris; I'm planning to work on this during upcoming week.
Stage three
(Stevens) New diagnostic element for troubleshooting (https://github.com/oasis-tcs/dita/issues/316)
(./) 02 September 2020: Proposal to reviewers (Sirois, Harrison)
(./) 03 September 2020: Feedback by reviewers completed
(./) 06 September 2020: Initial discussion by TC
13 October 2020: TC vote
[see items #9 and #10 below]
- Kris; we need another reviewer for Robert's proposal on data-about.
- Deb; I can do it.
8. DITA 2.0 stage two proposals
[no updates]
9. Question about diagnostics proposal
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202010/msg00023.html (Joseph, forwarded by Eberlein, 13 October 2020)
- Gershon; my take on the spec description of diagnostics element is that it implies user's ability to give either a list of causes, or a set of steps to resolve the problems, and that you can do either or both. But the grammar files allow either a list of causes, or steps to resolve, but not both. Do we want to clarify text, or change the grammar files to match the text?
- Kris; so to clarify the point, when we're talking about the content model for diagnostics, is it either/or or either/or/and?
- Dawn; I hadn't really thought about it that way; my original intent was for it to be one or the other, but not both; i.e., either present diagnostics in a prose form or as a list of steps. I hadn't thought of a use case for that situation, since none of my clients have needed it, but it's a valid question. I'm not sure which is the right way to go.
- Gershon; some of my clients have content complex enough that you would want both; a table to help with low-hanging fruit, but a list of steps for the really complicated cses.
- Kris; so do we need to correct that?
- Gershon; I'm not trying to reopen the feature, I just want clarification.
- Kris; my approach would be that given how late it is, we should just correct the spec description to match content model in grammar files. If we need to consider making changes, we could do it in 2.1, when we've given folks a chance to work with this structure and see how well it works. We know we are never going to find the perfect troubleshooting model to meet all the most complex cases, aiming for the best we can provide that will meet 80% of cases. We've gone down rabbit holes before, trying to chase complex edge cases.
- Gershon; that's fine, I haven't really discussed whether we'll use this in my client's content. I just wnated to clarify the spec as it goes out, happy with your proposal to clean up the discription.
- Dawn; Scott, you were thinking of using troubleshooting, what are you thinking?
- Scott; when I first provided input, i was at Jeppesen, and had a number of use cases, but at my current company, I haven't been able to convince mgmt. to use troubleshooting. So I don't know that I have current real world examples to provide feedback on it.
- Kris; any objections to our updating proposal to remove conflict?
[none]
***ActionItem: Dawn will update proposal #316 "Diagnostics element" to resolve difference between spec description and grammar files.
(both stage 2 and stage 3).
- Kris; Since we'll have to do some cleanup on both stage 2 and stage 3 (stage 3 proposal conrefs content from stage 2), we'll have to do a clean-up vote on stage 2 as well as the vote on stage 3. So we'll have to wait on vote till next week.
10. DITA 2.0 stage three proposals
Vote
#316 "Diagnostics element"
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202010/msg00019.html (Eberlein, 07 October 2020)
[no vote this week, because of previous item's resolution]
11:41 ET close
-- Ms. Nancy Harrison
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]