RE: Problem appendices

My thoughts below. One thing we need to keep clearly in mind is that these topics were moved to “Appendixes”, because folks had concerns about the content appearing in the normative section of the spec.

So, it is highly likely that content will need to be highly edited if we want to move these topics into the normative chapters of the spec.

@Eliot, @Robert, @Gershon – I’ll be interested in seeing your take on what you think we should do about these topics.

Best,

Kris

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

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

From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> On Behalf Of Burns, William
Sent: Monday, October 3, 2022 5:34 PM
To: DITA Technical Committee (dita@lists.oasis-open.org) <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] Problem appendices

Hi, all.

1. Considerations for generalizing . . .

While this is specific to <foreign>, I think it really should be in the generalization section - 8.4.6.
<kje>I think we ought to consider simply removing this content from the spec. I think it’s too focused on how processors should perform generalization, which we should leave up to processors to implement.</kje>

2. Processing interoperability . . .

Agree with Stan. Move to 7.8

<kje>I think that some of this material should move to chapter 7 “Processing”. But what material and where should it go? If we move the topic wholesale, then it’s likely that the sections need to be turned into individual topics.</kje>

3. Specialization design . . .

Agree with Stan. Move to 8.3.9 - Configuration and specialization

<kje>My first reaction is that this is tutorial info that does not belong in the spec, although it would be appropriate for a committee note. So maybe it should simply stay as an appendix?</kje>

Bill Burns

HP Inc.

Content & Taxonomy Enablement (CTE)

william.burns@hp.com

(208) 794-5709

dita message