dita message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Summary of points I raised in today's LwDITA subcommittee call
- From: Kristen James Eberlein <kris@eberleinconsulting.com>
- To: DITA TC <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>, "dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org" <dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 21:25:23 -0500
I don't know who was taking minutes, but I thought it might be
useful if I reiterated some of the points that I raised in today's
LwDITA subcommittee call:
If the LwDITA subcommittee wants to continue to
exist
The DITA TC has requirements for subcommittees. Specifically,
subcommittees need to:
- Have someone in a leadership position who is a voting member
of the DITA TC. Ideally, the voting member of the TC would be
the chair or co-chair. If that is not possible, the voting
member of the TC could serve as secretary of the subcommittee.
- Meet at least once monthly.
- Keep the subcommittee resources up-to-date. This includes
posting minutes and maintaining the calendar.
- Actively work on moving work forward.
- Have the voting member of the TC report once monthly about the
subcommittee to the TC.
The DITA TC requirements for subcommittees are outlined in a
document (attached), which the DITA TC developed and approved back
in 2016-2017.
I realize that subcommittee members want to discuss whether they
think this is feasible. If folks want the subcommittee to remain
in existence, I'd like to see someone committing to the following
by the end of the 2021 calendar year:
- Be able to be assume one of the following leadership roles:
chair, co-chair with Michael Priestley, or secretary
- Be a voting member of the DITA TC
Options for the subcommittee to finalize their
work on LwDITA
Obviously, if the subcommittee wants to continue to be involved
collectively in defining LwDITA, the subcommittee needs to
continue to exist.
What the TC considers viable options for
finalizing the LwDITA work
The TC has discussed the following options:
- Releasing LwDITA in conjunction with DITA 2.0 as a merged
specification (suggested by Carlos)
- Updating the existing LwDITA committee note
- (Post DITA 2.0) Publishing the current LwDITA spec work
(edited as necessary) as an OASIS draft committee specification.
The DITA TC would then probably leave the document at this state
in the OASIS process.
The conclusions of the TC were:
- #1 was not an option.
- #2 would be very labor intensive, as the committee note was:
1) authored to represent LwDITA as based on DITA 1.3 and so
would require extensive redesign, and 2) not really the
appropriate vehicle to provide the sort of element-reference
content currently authored in the draft LwDITA spec. (The OASIS
TC admin, Chet Ensign, also previously advised us that we were
skating pretty close to the boundaries with the LwDITA committee
note.)
- #3 would probably be the easiest and most effective. (This
also was based on the assumption that the LwDITA subcommittee
would close, and that. if possible, voting members of the DITA
TC would step forward and try to wrap up the work on LwDITA.)
Recommendations to members of the LwDITA
subcommittee
I recommended that members of the subcommittee focus on whether
they can keep the subcommittee afloat.
- If not:
- the DITA TC will make decisions about how to handle work on
LwDITA without any recommendations from the subcommittee.
- If yes:
- ÂMenbers of the subcommittee would continue to have
resources (e-mail list, document repository, other OASIS
benefits) to help them work collaboratively.
- DITA TC would consider recommendations from the subcommittee
as it decides how to handle LwDITA.
Ultimately, of course, decisions about what the DITA TC publishes
are made by the TC.
--
Best,
Kris
Attachment:
SubcommitteeGovernance.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]