dita message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 7 December 2021 uploaded
- From: Nancy Harrison<nharrison@infobridge-solutions.com>
- To: <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 18:55:32 +0000 (UTC)
Submitter's message
ActionItem:
1. Eliot will develop a new code sample for object element, using Acrobat parameters for PDF.
y=================================================
Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 7 December 2021
Recorded by Hancy Harrison
link to agenda for this meeting:
https://wiki.OASIS-open.org/dita/PreviousAgendas
[meeting cancelled]
Attendance:
Robert Anderson, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, Nancy Harrison, Scott Hudson, Gershon Joseph, Eliot Kimber, Zoe Lawson, Eric Sirois, Dawn Stevens, Frank Wegmann, Alan Hauser, Jim Tivy
Business
========
1. Roll call
Regrets: Carsten Brennecke, Keith Schengili-Roberts
2. Approve minutes from previous business meeting:
23 November 20212021
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202111/msg00053.html (Wegmann, 24 November 2021)
Kris moved, 2nd by Scott, approved by TC
3. Announcements
Deadline for submitting to present at ConVEX is extended to 10 December 2021.
4. Action items
[no updates]
16 November 2021:
Gershon: Talk to Precision Content dev team about developing tool to generate contains/contains content
23 November 2021:
Scott: Pursue possibilities of using Syncrosoft tooling for reviews
5. Report from LwDITA subcommittee (Wegmann)
- Frank; SC met yesterday, and talked last Friday, at which time Michael P. proposed me as co-chair of SC, that was approved yesterday. Wrt the question of how we continue; agreement is that we'll continue as a group. Michael and all group members support that. One of my first tasks will be to get a real understanding of LwD spec doc.
- Kris; it's really wonderful that you were willing to do this and continue work on LwD spec. I'll do all I can to help with processes and spec design. We might want to set up a regular meeting between you, Robert and I to keep work aligned.
- Frank; that would be positive.
- Kris; so you're thinking to move forward with spec rather than updated CN?
- Frank; we didn't talk expressly about that, but no one argued with my arguing for that. so there's implicit agreement to continue with spec.
- Kris; and now you're getting a good exposure to our spec review process with 2.0.
- Frank; yes, I find it interesting.
- Kris; we'll try to do that work.
6. Updated status from reviews A and B
Review A: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202112/msg00006.html (Eberlein, 07 December 2021)
Review B: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202112/msg00007.html (Eberlein, 07 December 2021)
- Kris; please take a look at the above links; includes resolution status of all comments.
- Zoe; thanks for all the work you put in.
- Kris; it's important to do this.
7. Status of review C
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202112/msg00008.html (Eberlein, 07 December 2021)
What comments still need handling?
Feedback from participants? Any things we could be doing better?
- Dawn; my name doesn't show up on leaderboard, though you're addressing my comments; not sure what that means...
- Kris; only the first comment about any issue shows up, not comments on an already existing comment. Any feedback from those participating in review?
- Zoe; is there a way to get notified about comments to your comments?
- Kris; no, I wish there was. As Dawn brought up, the leaderboard doesn't show comments to comments. Maybe I'll do a report for whole publication to do that, but the tool doesn't do it.
- Zoe; do we have a wiki page for 'oh crud, we didn't do this in 2.0, we'll do it in 2.1'?
- Kris; we haven't completely closed the door on 2,0, so we're not ready to do that.
- Zoe; my thought wrt that is about longq vs quote wrt attributions, getting into bibliographic quoting...
- Kris; if those are things you want TC to do for future releases, then send a comment to the TC. Then it will go on our agenda and we'll make a decision about it. Robert, any comments?
- Robert; we got a lot of feedback, and that's good. I'm glad to get a serious review.
- Kris; I'll try to get a report out in about a week.
8. Review D
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202112/msg00014.html (Eberlein, 07 December 2021)
- Kris; I'll open up this review later today, will be first to have both architecture topics and element refs; that's a change, but it's important to have these reviewed in tandem. most arch topics are pretty stable, though there are comments in some about possible changes. We want TC to consider whether we should remove some of these elements from 2.0; 1) all the 'has..' elements - these were all elements designed to let folks using subjectscheme have fine grained control. I don't know if anyone is using them, my sense is that folks trying to do taxonomy are using RDF as their tool, and anyway I don't understand how to write a good shortdesc for these, and that's problematic. All of subjectscheme came in from Erik Hennum, and he may be the only one who really understood what they were. And TC allowed it 2) subject relationship tables.
- Robert; as someone who was in TC when they were approved, I dislike them strongly; they were tested with tool that supported RDF output, and those elements were designed as a way to feed the RDF tool. I've never fully understood the use of them if you're getting into a complicated way of defining taxonomy. It's really redefining a tiny subset of RDF in DITA.
- Scott; do we need it to map anything? If you want to do outputs to generate RDF structures, do we have enough outside of these?
- Robert; no, but I don't think that matters; it's just not usable.
- Kris; authors found classification map markup, and this made navigation difficult in their DITA maps.
- Robert; I view this the way we treated machinery task. we just don't have the subject matter expertise to work on this.
- Eliot; as a standard, there's no reason to replicate, weakly, something that exists elsewhere.
- Robert; not suggesting taking out subjectscheme.
- Kris; we're not looking for a decision now, we want folks to look at these elements; if we were to remove the 'has..' elements, it would be simple for someone to create them as a domain.
- Nancy; what about our XNAL domain; it's also a small subset of a larger standard.
- Robert; it's a subset, but with a bunch of users, also it's part of techcomm, which we'll be dealing with it later.
- Kris; any more input?questions?
[none]
9. Review C comments that need TC feedback
Values for @height and @width: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202112/msg00000.html (Eberlein, 01 December 2021)
- Zoe; what about pc (picas)
- Robert; we agree that the way these are presented is problematical.
- Eliot; W3C has some interesting info on these.
- Nancy; the W3C list includes more than the ones we use...
- Kris; why don't Robert and I take this and work with it?
- Zoe; are there enough occurences to make it worthwhile to gather them?
- Robert; we could easily move this info into common @s section of spec.
[gen'l agreement]
Short description for alt: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202112/msg00010.html (Eberlein, 07 December 2021)
- Kris; we changed text [see above link]
- Nancy; I like it; the element was originally targeted for accessibility.
- Eliot; can we change 'can' to 'might'?
- Gershon; what about systems 'may' use it?
- Kris; we try to avoid using 'might.'
- Robert; we don't like 'might'; that sounds totally optional. This isn't that.
- Gershon; these days, most apps are accessibility-enabled.
- Eliot; why don't we substitute 'often' in place of 'can'
[gen'l agreement with this]
Short description for cite: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202112/msg00011.html (Eberlein, 07 December 2021)
[see above link for Kris's change]
- Frank; I like that, but what is a bibliographic resource? what does that mean? is it published or not? The definition says a 'published item'.
- Kris; we tried to illustrate it by examples.
- Scott; I like Zoe's suggestion 'outside scope of the content.'
- Kris; that was just too loosey goosey.
- Robert; also it doesn't have to be outside your content.
- Zoe; I'm working with some old stuff that has an actual bibliography, so it's a problem.
- Eliot; it's really just a reference to a thing that can be cited.
- Zoe; isn't it just a title?
- Eliot; it doesn't have to be a title; that's part of the challenge.
- Zoe; so cite can have all the inline elements inside of it?
- Robert; yes.
- Kris; unless someone comes up with something better, we'll use my changed one.
New example for object: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202112/msg00009.html (Eberlein, 07 December 2021)
- Kris; we need to remove Flash [obsolete] from our examples, but we have an example we can't just remove because it's so useful for other stuff. We need a new example; if anyone has an example for this.
- Eliot; why do you even need this example for object? There's another example.
- Robert; but it doesn't have the parameter elements that this one does.
- Eliot; we could just add some.
- Robert; just invent them?
- Eliot; but Acrobat already has them.
- Kris; Eliot, can you develop the new code sample?
***ActionItem: Eliot will develop new code sample for object element, using Acrobat parameters for PDF.
12 noon ET close
-- Ms. Nancy Harrison
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]