RE: [dita] Re: Meeting Request: Issues About OASIS andOASIS-Approved Publications

Adding items to Su-Laine's points, which I 
did not have time to cover in the meeting, now posting just to dita-adoption, 
perhaps for further follow-up next week:

 

I 
agree that a DITA guide in this format is genuinely useful, at least for 
those already using the tools covered, though not necessarily as an "official" 
OASIS guide, and not as a tool for evaluation. It certainly does not 
pretend to be comprehensive.

 

In 
terms of evaluating DITA tools, there have been some efforts to date, 
including Bob Doyle's CMS article "XML Editors Review" and his more recent 
article in the April 2008 Intercom, DITA Tools from A to Z. 
I contacted Bob at one point and he mentioned that 
the effort to track the growing list of DITA tools is monumental, even on a 
yearly basis.

 

In 
addition to any legal or perceptual issues with OASIS trying to track and 
review tools in a methodical manner, I question whether we can handle the 
scale of such a commitment. It's no problem to track two tools. Twenty tools is 
another matter.

 

As I 
am a DITA adopter, and not a vendor, I know what I would like. :-) I have had to 
test numerous tools on my own, and this is probably typical amongst 
companies and individuals evaluating DITA along with new 
tools.

 

I 
really, really liked the idea of a standardized test suite DITA project for 
running against tools. It would not have to be a particularly realistic example, 
contrary to my desire for a separate, real-world sample. (A real world sample 
would not most likely make use of every single major feature of DITA and would 
probably look silly if it did.)

 

I find 
that when vendors say they support DITA (and no offense here to the vendors), it 
doesn't mean much of anything to me. I have to test what support really means 
and whether the level of support meets my particular needs.

 

From a 
logistical standpoint, we at OASIS may be in no better position than to come up 
with standards, define levels of compliance per some objective criteria, and 
possibly indicate what tools pass compliance when submitted to us. If we are 
going to take on this role of confirming compliance, I think the onus 
should be on vendors to submit on a first come first serve basis, not for us to 
find and track.

 

If we 
do take on the role of confirming compliance, I think we should make the process 
formal and announce it to the general industry via the usual communication 
channels for these kinds of processes.

 

I also 
think that a test suite would be really useful to vendors wanting to create or 
improve tools that support DITA. There have been a few tools that I have 
reviewed that--without mentioning names--have not impressed me with their 
interpretation and level of DITA-support. I suspect that if a particular vendor 
had actually worked from an objective and full set of criteria along with a 
test model, they might have implemented things differently, to the benefit of 
the market and themselves.

 

In an 
ideal world, I'd love to see the Help Guide's hands-on, real-world approach 
used on every single DITA tool out there. Such documentation would be fantastic 
for companies prototyping solutions and testing tools. In the end, I do not 
think it is practical for us to document every single tool, no matter how 
valuable. We may simply have to leave it up to each vendor whether they supply 
such documentation against a standardized test suite from 
OASIS.

 

On the 
other hand, I do think of the DITA OT as a lowest common denominator 
implementation. When I first evaluated DITA, I went to the source, then checked 
vendor solutions. I used the OT as a comparative baseline. While it 
would make sense for vendors to cover their own documentation needs proving how 
easy it is to use DITA, it would make sense for OASIS to cover its own open 
source solution referencing a standard test suite on equal 
footing. I do think it would make sense at the beginning of the material to 
make clear that the OT is a reference and one of many implementations, then 
point people off to some other vehicle for tool review.

 

I 
think it would be fair for us to post such a practical OT "guide" 
referencing a standard test suite somewhere, whether official or 
unofficial, and invite vendors to submit links to their own solutions, 
all on equal footing. And if the vendor solution ends up looking better 
than the nuts and bolts DITA OT, so be it (and I hope so, 
too).

 

For me 
as an evaluator, an OASIS test suite, a standard hands-on guide to get the 
reference system running for detailed testing, and competitive, comparative, 
parallel information from vendors would be heaven. In the worst case, I'll 
take a new tool and run it against the test suite myself without documentation 
and see what it can do. Either way, with or without accompanying documentation 
for the test suite, I win as an adopter.

 

Troy

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
-----Original Message-----
From: Su-Laine Yeo 
  [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 
  2009 12:44 PM
To: Bruce Nevin (bnevin); Michael Priestley; 
  ; 
Cc: 
  ; ; 
  
Subject: RE: [dita] Re: Meeting 
  Request: Issues About OASIS and OASIS-Approved 
  Publications

  

  
Hi Mary and 
  everyone,

  
 

  
It's been an 
  interesting past few weeks. Below I've tried to summarize some *potential* 
  issues in publishing OASIS guides to technologies. Not all of these apply to 
  any discussions we've had about this particular guide, however I think it is 
  useful to put them on the table as hypothetical issues for purposes of 
  formulating and clarifying OASIS's general policies on the publishing of 
  technology guides under its name. 

  
 

  
- The public might 
  perceive that the products associated with subcommittee TC members are given 
  more prominence than the products of non-members, and consider OASIS to be 
  less credible as a result.

  
- Vendors whose 
  products have not been included in the guide might complain that they didn't 
  receive adequate notice about the fact that the document was being written, 
  and didn't have a fair chance to have their products considered for 
  inclusion.

  
- Useful 
  information about a product might be omitted from a guide in order to make it 
  more palatable to the product vendor who holds a vote on whether to accept or 
  reject the guide.

  
- Claims about a 
  particular product may turn out to be false advertising. If false advertising 
  appears in content published by OASIS, who is responsible for 
  it?

  
- Is it a good use 
  of TC time and energy to try to evaluate a technology guide written by a 
  subcommittee?

  
- Can a TC provide 
  a meaningful approval of a technology guide written by a subcommittee if TC 
  members do not have access to some of technologies described in the 
  guide?

  
 

  
Again, not all of 
  these issues have come up in the discussion about this particular guide, but 
  these are the types of things that I think are useful to put on the table for 
  purpose of formulating OASIS policy.

  
 

  
I also want to 
  echo Kris Eberlein’s sentiment appreciating the effort that has been put into 
  this guide so far by Help SC members. Much of the information the Help SC has 
  produced is useful to the public; the question we are trying to address is if 
  and how the OASIS name should be associated with it.

  
 

  
Best 
  regards,

  
Su-Laine

  
 

  
Su-Laine 
  Yeo
Interaction 
  Design Specialist 

  
JustSystems 
  Canada, Inc.
Office: 
  778-327-6356 
  


  
www.justsystems.com 
  

  
 

  
 

  

  

  
From: Bruce Nevin 
  (bnevin) [mailto:] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 
  11:34 AM
To: Michael Priestley; 
  
Cc: ; 
  ; 
Subject: RE: 
  [dita] Re: Meeting Request: Issues About OASIS and OASIS-Approved 
  Publications

  
 

  
Where 
  angels fear ...

  
 

  
Since 
  my organization is a DITA adopter rather than potential competitor in the 
  vendor space serving adopters, maybe I can dare to be a bit more 
  forthright.

  
 

  
Representatives 
  of member organizations meet on committees and subcommittees in a cooperative 
  spirit to establish standards, guidelines, etc. to the mutual benefit of 
  all.

  
 

  
Might 
  another organization enter such a committee (or view its work and membership 
  from the outside) and construe that cooperative spirit as collusion among an 
  anti-competitive cabal? 

  
 

  
Surely 
  in the full breadth of OASIS such issues have arisen before and been 
  addressed. As one possible approach, is "mutual 
  benefit" defined in the broadest sense somewhere in the OASIS umbrella 
  such that no one can construe it in a narrow, exclusionary sense, and can a TC 
  or SC point to that umbrella definition should the issue 
  arise?

  
 

  
    
  /Bruce Nevin

  
    
 

    

    
    

    
From: Michael 
    Priestley [mailto:] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 
    2009 2:01 PM
To: 
Cc: 
    ; ; 
    
Subject: Re: [dita] Re: Meeting Request: 
    Issues About OASIS and OASIS-Approved Publications

    

Hi Stan, 
    

To 
    clarify, I don't think anyone suggested that an OASIS member organization 
    would sue another OASIS member organization. The question was, are there any 
    concerns about a group of OASIS member organizations writing about the 
    products of other companies (or writing about some products but not others, 
    for that matter). 

So much for not 
    characterizing the issues in writing :-) But I wanted to correct the 
    characterization of the chit-chat anyway. 

Michael 
    Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM)
Lead IBM DITA Architect 
    

http://dita.xml.org/blog/25 
    

    
      
      

        
          
 
          

          
03/18/2009 
          01:23 PM 

        
          
            
            

              
                
To

              
                
 
                

            

              
                
cc

              
                
, 
                 

            

              
                
Subject

              
                
Re: 
                [dita] Re: Meeting Request: Issues About OASIS and 
                OASIS-Approved 
          Publications

          
 

          
            
            

              
              

    

Hi Mary 
    --

Spring is in the air. With chit-chat about OASIS member 
    organizations being open to suing other OASIS member organizations and OASIS 
    individual members, it may not be prudent for any individual to characterize 
    the issues in writing (hence the intentional vagueness in my previous 
    email). 

Perhaps the best course would be to have the TC next Tuesday 
    "approve" the minutes of our meeting yesterday, thereby providing an 
    appropriate starting place for defining the issues pertinent to the meeting 
    that we'd like to organize with you. 

Sorry ... I wish that it were 
    as simple as summarizing the explicit points of 
    debate.

Stan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mary 
    McRae" 
To: 
Cc: , 
    
Subject: [dita] Re: Meeting Request: Issues 
    About OASIS and OASIS-Approved Publications
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 
    00:12:04 -0400

Hi Stan,

 It would be most helpful if you 
    could provide the list of issues in advance so I can make sure to have the 
    right people involved - once I have a better idea I can look at schedules 
    and see what will work for everyone.

Regards,

Mary

On 
    Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 8:34 PM, <> wrote: 
    
Hi Mary -- 
  
In the process of reviewing the DITA Help 
    Technologies Guide (attached), the DITA Technical Committee bumped into some 
    issues -- some potentially legal -- that are beyond the scope of our TC. We 
    suspect (and hope) that other TCs or working groups in OASIS have 
    encountered and resolved such issues. 
  
We are hoping that you 
    could set up a concall next week with you and with the following DITA 
    people: 
-  
-  
- Micheal Priestley 
- Don 
    Day 
- Stan Doherty 
  
Two goals for the meeting -- 
1. 
    Review the issues. 
2. Identify from the OASIS side of things possible 
    precedents, resources, and solution strategies 
  
Thanks, 
    
Stan Doherty 
  

-- 
Mary P 
    McRae
Manager of TC Administration, OASIS

voip: 
    603.232.9090