dita message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Groups - DITA TC Meeting Minutes 18 October 2022 uploaded
- From: Nancy Harrison<nharrison@infobridge-solutions.com>
- To: <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 18:45:26 +0000 (UTC)
Submitter's message
ActionItems:
1. Kris will ping Keith re: volunteer task on updating accessibility topics.
2. Kris will look for information on term 'user.'
=================================================
Minutes of the OASIS DITA TC
Tuesday, 18 October 2022
Recorded by Hancy Harrison
link to agenda for this meeting:
https://wiki.OASIS-open.org/dita/PreviousAgendas
Attendance:
===========
Robert Anderson, Bill Burns, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, Nancy Harrison, Scott Hudson, Gershon Joseph, Eliot Kimber, Zoe Lawson, Eric Sirois, Dawn Stevens, Jim Tivy, Kendall Shaw
Business
========
1. Roll call
Regrets: Gershon Joseph (came late), Frank Wegmann
2. Approve minutes from previous business meeting:
11 October 2022
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202210/msg00026.html (Harrison, 17 October 2022)
Kris moved, 2nd Scott, approved by TC
3. Announcements
[new member: Kendall Shaw from Intel]
4. Action items
04 October 2022
Kris and Eliot: Review e-mails listed under generalization, suggest direction spec should take COMPLETED
11 October 2022:
Eliot: Modify file names of source for the migration committee note, open pull request
- Eliot; you should have the pull request for these.
5. Volunteer tasks
Eliot: Update image for "Overview of document-type shells" topic COMPLETED
Keith Schengili-Roberts: Two new example topics from accessibility review
***ActionItem: Kris will ping Keith re: accessibility topics.
Dawn and Comtech: Develop draft of changes from DITA 1.3 to DITA 2.0 (due 18 October 2022)
- Dawn; I have to edit this; it's drafted, just needs to be edited. I won't be on next call because of LavaCon, but I'll send it so you can discuss it.
6. Review of DITA 2.0 proposal deadlines
https://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/DeadlinesDITA2.0
[updates only; for complete list see above link]
Combined stage two and three
(Kimber) Change @poster to (https://github.com/oasis-tcs/dita/issues/753)
(./) 10 October 2022: Submit to reviewers (Eberlein, Hudson)
- ris; I got my review back to Eliot.
- Scott; I haven't gotten a chance to go over it yet.
- Kris; when do you think you can?
- -Scott; I should be able to get to it this week.
Stage three
(Anderson) New impose-role attribute (https://github.com/oasis-tcs/dita/issues/670)
30 September 2022: Submit to reviewers (Joseph, Wegmann)
- Robert; I'm making progress, not done but I have a draft; I'll aim to finish it by this Friday.
- Kris; let us know if there's any way we can help.
(Kimber) Clean-up changes (https://github.com/oasis-tcs/dita/issues/397)
18 October 2022: Initial TC discussion
- Kris; this is on agenda for today, hopefully we can vote next week.
7. DITA 2.0 stage two/three combined proposals
Initial discussion
Cleanup items (proposal #397)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202210/msg00023.html (Kimber, 17 October 2022)
- Eliot; this item covers doc changes that Robert made in response to cleanup items we've discovered; the table gives item issue, solution, examples and migration info. A lot of these were cleaning up old @s; or removing deprecated @s (in many cases - e.g. @navtitle - removed because they're replace by elements; or elements like sectiondiv that were removed because it's replaced by div.
- Kris; these are things we didn't have clearly marked in our original proposal for deprecated elements, e.g. removing 'has' element from subjectscheme,
- Eliot; none of these were controversial; theyjust needed to be documented. And thanks to Robert for clean commit messages.
- Kris; any objections to a vote next week?
[none; TC will vote next week]
8. Technical content spec: Editorial questions about task elements
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202210/msg00025.html (17 October 2022)
- Kris; we're moving to techcontent spec for 2 reasons; 1) most of what's left in base spec is challenging, and 2) we don't want to put off this to the very end, we want to set up patterns for reusing content from base to techcontent.
- Robert; first tiem from above email is wrt generated labels for task sections? Should spec mention that things work better with generated headings?
- Eliot; these elements are all specializations of section, except for precs. So we'd say this in rendering expectations?
- Kris; or maybe in usage information, e.g. maybe 'many implementations find it useful to generate labels.'
- Robert; I lean toward rendering
- Eliot; we might just remind folks that these are specializations of section, and that the general practice is to put labels on specializations of section.
- Dawn; I agree with Kris; I always talk to my clients about this;
- Stan; I agree, I think most of our implementations put labels in onscreen for authors.
- Kris; but it's something that new implementations often miss if they don't have a consultant. And Robert and I disagree; I prefer usage, Robert prefers rendering.
- Robert; usage is how authors use element, rendering is how it appears onscreen.
- Kris; But it does seems that there's general consensus that it's OK to have such a statement
- Robert; originally the docs implied that these elements aren't useful without a label, in 1.0 you had to use a parameter, and people didn't know about them. If we have it turned on by default, you wouldn't need anything in the docs.
- Kris; I seeded the core topics in review with one or two such statements; I put it in usage, not rendering.
- Robert; second item from email is on @importance on step element. That's the only element where we restrict values of that @. Do we need to mention it in step element?
- Nancy; do we say anythinga bout it now?
- Kris; no
- Robert; was anyone aware of this?
- Eliot; I was
- Robert; were you aware that OOTB O-T does something with that?
- Kris; I've also often seen it not rendered by implementations.
- Robert; some folks use it and expect it, because no other element does it.
- Eliot; if we've never said anything about it to date, it can't be that urgent.
- Kris; but we haven't reviewed techcontent element reference topics since 1.0. Given that 2.0 will be the basis for techcontent for a long time, now is the time to think about it. I could support making a mention that values for @importance are limited, and that processors should do something about it. For a step, it should be either optional or required.
- Eliot; I wouldn't object to saying something.
- Robert; if we're adding a rendering note to task sections, we should add one here as well.
- Robert; And the third item from the email is the question of an alternative to the terms 'user/s'.
- Kris; It's hard to come up with a single term that might be used. In the spec, it's can refer to authors, developers, content architects, or end-user reader of content.
- Robert; reason this stands out to me was a comment by a speaker at some conference that the only place where people use that term is for drug addicts and software docs.
- Zoe; I've had sense of "don't say 'user'" ingrained; another reason to change is to make sure we're talking to the right person; are we talking about DITA user (author, implementor, IA, spec designer) or end user of the documentation being created?
- Kris; Let's ask folks to think about this while working thru our reviews. in any case.
- Nancy; are there alternatives? It's been around in this context for a very long time, though I'd want to address Zoe's concern about different roles.
- Stan; the term 'user' isn't mentioned in OASIS glossary.
- Dawn; and I did a web search on synonyms for it; beside the ones that are drug-related, there are none that fit our context; the closest are customer or client.
- Zoe; there's also a question of 'user' in a standardized English dictionary; what makes sense across non-native English speakers?
- Kris; I'll look at the book 'Writing for a Global Audience' on global English; it has good recommendations.
***ActionItem: Kris will look for information on term 'user.'
- Kris; does anyone have access to specialized DBs for standardized english?
- Stan; I have access to people who probably have that access...
9. Technical content review A: Task overview and elements (18 October - 01 November 2022)
Opening of review
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202210/msg00032.html
- Kris; we opened up review today; ContentFusion wasn't respecting my order of things; it reversed my order. If you're comparing 1.3 and 2.0 topics, note that we did simplification of concept/task/reference types, we're not redefining the elements. We're having to reconcile where things are currently defined twice in spec. We need to figure out where we want to have it done; we want to single-source. We haven't come to decision on how to handle shortdesc in techcontent; for those kinds of topics, it's less amenable to natural language. We'd like to come out of this with consistency on how to handle shortdescs.
- Robert; I have strong opinions on shortdesc; I'd like them to use natural language.
- Kris; questions?
[none]
10. Generalization
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202209/msg00002.html (Joseph, 04 September 2022)
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202209/msg00008.html (Eberlein, 06 September 2022)
Where we mention generalization in the DITA 2.0 spec
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202209/msg00010.html (Eberlein, 06 September 2022)
Analysis by Eliot Kimber
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202210/msg00019.html (Kimber, 16 October 2022)
Analysis by Kris Eberlein
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202210/msg00024.html (Eberlein, 17 October 2022)
- Eliot; anywhere we talk about generalization that has a process, shouldn't be in spec; it's enough to say that for any DITA content, you can view it in terms of its most or least specialized markup. This is simply a fact about DITA content. Even if it's necessary to define a specific transform, that shouldn't be in the spec. My sense is that the only thing to be retained in 2.0 is section 2.4, the overview of generalization.
- Kris; my followup email agrees with Eliot. I wonder if we need to review 2.4 (see email) to add to conditional processing
- Eliot; all discussion of grouping syntax should be in discusion of conditional @s.
- Kris; it currently links to the topic about generalization; we just need to give the current links a different target.
- Eliot; wrt conrefs; generalization is something you have to do if our processor requires it, but there's no reason for the processor to require it. For example, the statement for 6.4.12 presumes a particular processing result, so it shouldn't be in spec.
- Kris; I know we touched this topic as part of keytext element, but we haven't reviewed this topic, or any of the topics in my email. The content is prescribing a process for generalization; let's wait on handling refs to generalization until we reviewdo the review. I'll make a note to pay attention to them.
- Eliot; the DITA standard started as doc for a particular implementation, it was IBM's spec, We've tried to move away from that, but a lot is still there.
- Kris; when we review these, we'll have to look at them from that POV.
- Gershon; I agree with everything that's been said; your thread is taking us in the right direction.
11. DITA 1.x to 2.0 migration work
Update about the committee note?
- Eliot; CN isn't really in a state for formal review, though I've done work on it.
- Kris; but it's probably good enough for some feedback.
12. DITA 2.0 spec review: Appendixes (28 September - 10 October 2022
Opening of review
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202209/msg00042.html (Eberlein, 28 September 2022)
Topics that need review
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202210/msg00003.html (04 October 2022)
Status:
Comments about "Element-by element recommendations"
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202210/msg00014.html (Eberlein, 11 October 2022)
Final status:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/202210/msg00021.html (Eberlein, 17 October 2022)
- Gershon; I'll take a read of the content to prepare for discussion ext week.
12 noon ET close
-- Ms. Nancy Harrison
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]