dita message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 2 November 2021 uploaded
- From: Nancy Harrison<nharrison@infobridge-solutions.com>
- To: <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2021 04:34:19 +0000 (UTC)
Submitter's message
ActionItems:
1. Robert will update the grammar files for @title-role in titlealt, and make a note about it being a bug fix to beta 0.2.
2. [Kris & possibly Robert] Kris will see if she can get DITAWeb back up and running; if not, Robert will set up wiki pages.
3*. Robert and Kris to produce explanation of element ref template and what we're asking folks to look for in review
4. Kris will kick off review next week,
5. Scott will communicate with Oxygen wrt our using ContentFusion.
=================================================
Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 2 November 2021
Recorded by Hancy Harrison
link to agenda for this meeting:
https://wiki.OASIS-open.org/dita/PreviousAgendas
Attendance:
Robert Anderson, Kris Eberlein, Carlos Evia, Nancy Harrison, Scott Hudson, Gershon Joseph, Chris Nitchie, Keith Schengili-Roberts, Eric Sirois, Dawn Stevens
Business
========
1. Roll call
Regrets: Zoe Lawson, Carsten Brennecke
2. Approve minutes from previous business meeting:
26 October 2021
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202111/msg00000.html (Harrison, 01 November 2021)
moved by Kris (w/Carlos's changes), 2nd by Carlos, approved by TC
3. Announcements
4. Action items
26 November 2021
Kris & Carlos: Determine how LwDITA committee note would need to be updated
Kris: Send updated charter to Chet Ensign COMPLETED
Eric: Update LwDITA DTDs to have common .mod and .ent files
- Kris; LwD work under agenda item #5
5. LwDITA work
DTDs
Updated committee note?
- Eric; my action item is done; I delivered updates to Github repo.
- Kris; did you have any questions?
- Eric; not at the moment.
- Carlos; and I did all the commits and pull requests for the changes.
- Kris; so I'll mark that AI as done.
- Kris; the question is 'what to do about updating the Lwd CN'? I printed out and read thru the 2nd version of it, which was published in 2018. Most of the CN is from POV that LwD is part of regular DITA, so it doesn't work well with current situation.
Because of that, it might be easier to publish a 'draft' version of LwD spec. We could produce a committee draft of LwD spec, and push it into OASIS review, and never push it further than a draft. It would give it a bit more formality, and let us get language ref topics out to people. But since LwD is now based on 2.0, it doesn't make sense to do it till we're much further along with 2.0. Comments?
- Robert; I think that's right; it would be weird to have an LwD CN come out based on 2.0 when 2.0 isn't out.
- Nancy; are people just waiting for a spec, or just using it?
- Carlos; no one is waiting for spec; it would be nice, but no one's waiting for it. When we go to conferences, no one is asking 'when is OT going to support CN?' The type of user we have for LwD, especially for MDITA, doesn't need a detailed spec. But OTOH, we don't have data wrt XDITA; we don't know anyone using XDITA.
- Robert; I disagree; anyone using LwD today doesn't care. but there's a chance that having it as a spec would open it up to more people; it would encourage tools to support it, which would encourage uptake among folks not using it today. I think it would get wider adoption.
- Carlos; so it's all about the OT...
- Kris; I've worked with clients who won't work with something until it's been blessed by OASIS.
- Keith; I'm not aware of many tools that support LwD. Where it's being used, they just want it to work with tools; they don't care about it being an official spec.
- Kris; people using it have reqs for multimedia. Folks who've needed multimedia support know it's not there yet for LwD.
- Keith; but in my experience, multimedia hasn't been a dealbreaker; it's not being used. Especially when LwD's being used to convert Markdown to DITA and back again, it hasn't been an issue. multimedia is a nice-to-have, not critical.
- Kris; I talked to someone about LwD who really needed multimedia.
- Keith; I only had one instance, where it's being used within a software context, and there's not really a call for multimedia in that context.
- Kris; I suggest we finish our AIs for LwD, then shelve discussion about it till we're further along in 2.0 process. Though I'd like to get feedback about what I suggested wrt doing a draft spec only.
- Robert; I like that idea, it's in line with a lot of other OASIS standards.
- Carlos; my concern here is that to get LwD spec in a shareable condition, that will be several hours of work.
- Kris; several hours of work is doable, several weeks of work is not. When you and I talk, we can come up with some estimates of the work to be done, especially wrt @ language. Carlos, are you available sometime this week?
- Carlos; Friday?
- Nancy; I think putting it out as a draft spec is a good idea; whatever we do to make folks think it's more 'formal' is a good idea.
6. Question about titlealt and @title-role
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202111/msg00001.html (Eberlein, 01 November 2021)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202111/msg00002.html (Nitchie, 01 November 2021)
- Kris; question is, should @title-role for titlealt be required by grammar files?
- Chris; I don't know what I was thinking when I wrote the grammar files without including it. I went thru a couple of itierations, I think it should be a required @ on titlealt.
- Kris; should it have a default?
- Chris; no, I think it should be a required @, without a default, though it could be specialized to have a default. Is there a processor default? That might be why I didn't mark it,
- Robert; I think Chris's suggestion is good.
- Chris; specializations can refer to different roles.
- Kris; any comments? [none] I'd suppport it; it would get rid of unexpected consequences for users, and make it easier to write the spec. So do we need to open the proposal, or making it in a bug fix? Does anyone think we should reopen the proposal?
[no, will be treated as a bug fix]
***ActionItem: Robert will update the grammar files for @title-role in titlealt, and make a note about it being a bug fix to beta 0.2.
7. Spec work completed
https://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/editorialWorkCompleted
- Kris; we've tried to keep this up to date, not as much as we'd like, but we're now back to working on it, so I want to drive forward reviews of element ref topics. Robert, anything to add?
- Robert; we need to get this going and get thru it.
8. DITA 2.0: Element-reference reviews
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202111/msg00005.html (Eberlein, 02 November 2021)
- Kris; we want to start reviews next week; broken down into sections; I don't think top-down is best, but we want to have reviews every week with a grouping of topics. e.g., 1st grouping would be for basic topic, titlealt domain, and maybe multimedia. Then we can do another group each week after that, as it makes sense and depending on readiness for review; maybe have each review open for 2 weeks, so they'd be overlapping.
- Robert; we think small, easily digestible reviews are the way to go; large reviews don't get done by enough people, so small units are the only way to get real reviews. So we need to get started now, hoping a bunch of short reviews can get us a good overall review of spec. We don't have a schedule yet; we can't make a schedule till we know how well tools are working.
- Kris; so we'll start next week with a small review, only ~18 topics, if we have to default to using wiki pages, we can do that. I hope we can use DITAWeb, but either way we can get some work done. so we can figure out how to proceed before it gets heavy. Robert and I need to have a good list of what we want folks to look for, plus style guide rules and expectations, e.g. format for shortdesc, what goes into processing expectations, etc. We have a good start on that, but need to finalize it.
- Scott; can we see if Oxygen has a solution for tools?
- Kris; this is a good point to move to item #9
[item #9 discussion occured before returning to this point]
- Kris; are folks ok with starting next Tuesday? It would be pages from PDF or element ref topics, and comments would be added in DITAWeb or something else, e.g., wiki pages where they can add comments.
- Dawn; I'm fine doing reviews, but not till after Thanksgiving; my teaching load is too heavy till then.
- Kris; I'm curious about who on the TC did reviews, both at 1.2 and at 1.3.
o Nancy, Eric, Robert, Scott (and Eliot); both 1.2 and 1.3
o Dawn; 1.3, and at 1.2 Joann asked me to look at some.
o Keith; vague memories of 1.2, stronger for 1.3
o Chris, Carlos; 1.3 not 1.2
o Gershon; 1.2 but not 1.3
o Frank, Zoe; neither
- Kris; anyone besides Dawn not available this month?
- Gershon; some availabillllity, and I can probably bring in some Precision Content folks at some point.
- Kris; that would be useful.
***ActionItem: [Kris & possibly Robert] Kris will see if she can get DITAWeb back up and running; if not, Robert will set up wiki pages.
****ActionItem: Robert and Kris to produce explanation of element ref template and what we're asking folks to look for in review
***ActionItem: Kris will kick off review next week,
- Kris; we'll just do a small batch. We have to keep our timeframe in mind; would be great to get 2.0 out by end of 2022, so we have to get reviews now.
- Robert; I think ti's structured better than it's been in the past, so I don't think reviews should take very long. I really like the new format for lang ref topics and it will make reviews easier. In 1.3, we really focused on architectural topics, and lang ref topics were lower priority, so for some lang ref topics this will be the first review in a decade, so reviews will really help.
- Kris; we want to get reactions to new format, find topics that will be gnarly.
- Robert; most of the techcontent spec topics probably not reviewed since 1.1.
- Kris; e.g. abstract topic, and how it overlaps with shortdesc.
9. Review tooling
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202111/msg00006.html (Eberlein, 02 November 2021)
- Kris; I sent email, said I'd try to get DITAWeb up and running, but it's no longer supported, and Mekon is no longer a member of OASIS, so we don't know if we'll be able to use it.
***ActionItem: Scott will communicate with Oxygen wrt our using ContentFusion.
- Kris; we do have technical reqs for whatever tools we use. We went thru a process with OASIS to allow us to use outside tools, but we had to have transparency and availability of work product, so our reviews were available to public, and comments had to be archived. We sucked comments out of DITAWeb and published them. on TC site. Another req was that reviewers had to be able to see all comments made by other reviewers, tools supported discussion, and editors had to be able to respond. Wrt OASIS wiki pages, DITAWeb, or ContentFusion; Scott mentioned Oxygen feedback, but I don't know how that would work.
- Scott; ContentFusion would be preferable, except for the 'public review' part.
- Kris; but if we were using ContentFusion, it could be public, based on webeditor, so publicly viewable.
- Scott; so I'll reach out and see if they have a public instance that they would set up for us.
- Kris; any other review tools?
- Eric; we have one we could possibly use, would require some setup, If oxygen can't work, i could check into using it.
- Kris; awesome, Eric.
11:54 ET close
-- Ms. Nancy Harrison
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]