RE: [docbook-tc] RE: [docbook] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Agenda: 17 June 2009

["Gershon Joseph (gerjosep)" <gerjosep@cisco.com>]

Hi Scott,

Please see my comments inline below.

Cheers,
Gershon 

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Hudson [mailto:scott.hudson@flatironssolutions.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 6:43 PM
To: Gershon Joseph (gerjosep)
Cc: Rowland, Larry; Bob Stayton; DocBook Technical Committee;
docbook@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [docbook-tc] RE: [docbook] DocBook Technical Committee
Meeting Agenda: 17 June 2009

Thanks for your comments Gershon!

The thought behind separating the resources from the structure is that
it follows the IMS manifest model, where the resources can be flexibly
managed apart from the structure, but still delivered in one complete
package. This also allows the structure to be re-arranged without having
to adjust the resources.
<gershon>OK, I'll have to play with this a bit to see how it pans
out...</gershon>

We don't want to "copy" DITA, but to enable capabilities beyond what
DITA can provide. This is where the relationships is more powerful, IMO,
than the reltable approach in DITA.
<gershon>I know we're not copying DITA, but users coming to DocBook
(well more accurately, refraining from moving away from DocBook to DITA)
need to understand what's different and/or what's better from the "DITA
way". I don't understand your reference to the reltable approach -- I
didn't see anything to do with link relationship link management in
Larry's sample. Please could you expand what you mean to imply by this
statement.</gershon>