RE: [docbook-tc] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Agenda: 15 November 2006

["Grosso, Paul" <pgrosso@ptc.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Stayton [mailto:bobs@sagehill.net] 
> Sent: Monday, 2006 November 13 02:29
> To: DocBook Technical Committee
> Cc: docbook@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [docbook-tc] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting 
> Agenda: 15 November 2006
> 
> DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Agenda: 15 November 2006
> =============================================================

I must send my regrets.  Proxy to the chair, if such makes
sense in OASIS-land.

Please consider my comments below as my position on the
various issues. 

> 
>     a. Norm to write task/topic email to initiate discussion
>        on the docbook list.

Unfortunately, I just realized I'm not on the docbook list,
just the TC list, so I missed most of this discussion.

Under the related "RFE 1097183: Allow Task as a sibling of sections"
discussion, I did make a fairly strong stand at
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook-tc/200610/msg00019.html
and my position on adding a topic to DocBook runs in a similar vein.

DTDs are supposed to be the result of an information analysis
within a certain domain.  One doesn't add elements to DTDs for
"political" reasons.  I see no reason to confound the DocBook
doctype with DITA-ish concepts just because DITAishness is the
latest cause célèbre.

I am opposed to adding topic to the DocBook doctype.


> 
> 7.  OASIS IP policy.

As I suggested at
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook-tc/200611/msg00021.html
I would like to propose that we open the IPR transition issue 
by asking if there are any objections to going with OASIS' 
"RF on Limited Terms" option.  This most closely matches the
sense of what I believe we have always thought of as our
modus operandi, and it is what the DITA TC just agreed to.

If there are objections, those objecting can start an email 
discussion about it. If there are no objections, we can task 
someone (Norm?) to draft the necessary documents offline, and 
then we can vote on them.


> 
> 8.  info in html tables (Scott)

My position is at
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook-tc/200611/msg00018.html

I'd prefer to keep such info out of HTML tables.


> 9.  Extend charter to include commercial publishing [2] (Scott)

I'm not sure what I think of this.


> 
> 10.  Unfinished business: RFE 1097183: Allow Task as a 
> sibling of sections

I continue to be opposed to this.


paul