Process question: updating stage two proposals

[kris eberleinconsulting.com <kris@eberleinconsulting.com>]

Hi, DITA TC members.

 

A process question here: When do we need to revise and reopen stage two proposals? What changes can we make regarding the technical solution when we are at the stage three point?

 

I ask because we’ve reopened a number of stage two proposals. (Note that this list is probably not complete …) :

 

• #647: Remove classification domain and add new attribute
  Reason: To enable @subjectrefs on <map> as well as <topicref> (changes to approved “Technical solution”)
• #316: New <diagnostics> element
  Reason: Changes to content model requested by Silke Achterfeld, Ericsson

 

I’m bringing this up because one of the reviewers of the stage three proposal for #647 wants to make a change to the “Technical solution” which is conref’d from the stage two proposal.

 

How would folks feel if we did something like the following? Stage three proposal lists “Here is what was approved in the stage two proposal for the technical solution, and here is what we are proposing for now (at stage three) for the technical solution – the changes are …”

 

Obviously, we would not do this for a substantive change, but for a minor detail, I don’t think that we should expend the effort on reopening and revising a stage two proposal.

 

Best,

Kris

 

Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Owner, Eberlein Consulting LLC
kris@eberleinconsulting.com

Skype: kriseberlein; voice: +1 (919) 622-1501