RE: [dita] Scoping DITA 1.0 [was: OASIS DITA TC: 07 December 2004 meeting reminder]

MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
















dita message






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]








Subject: RE: [dita] Scoping DITA 1.0 [was: OASIS DITA TC: 07 December 2004 meeting reminder]




From: "Larsen, Seraphim L" <>
To: "Michael Priestley" <>,  "Paul Grosso" <>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2004 11:08:37 -0700









I like Erik Hixson's idea of using a white 
paper to address the use of the specialization mechanism outside 
of DITA.  I agree with you, Michael, that this shouldn't be part of 
the spec -- especially for 1.0.
 
Seraphim

___________________________________________________________
Seraphim 
Larsen                  
ICG Technical Publications
Technical 
Writer                          
Intel Corporation
(480) 
552-6504                                 
Chandler, AZ 
The content 
of this message is my personal opinion only. 
Although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make 

here in no way represent Intel's position 
on the issue, nor 
am I authorized to speak 
on behalf of Intel on this matter.
___________________________________________________________ 
 



From: Michael Priestley 
[mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 10:54 
AM
To: Paul Grosso
Cc: DITA TC list
Subject: Re: 
[dita] Scoping DITA 1.0 [was: OASIS DITA TC: 07 December 2004 meeting 
reminder]



During the call I advocated adding a 
topic to the spec that laid out the costs/benefits for creating new base 
classes, and potentially covering recommendations for ways to minimize breakage 
of the architecture when/if breakage becomes inevitable (for example, if new 
metadata requirements are absolutely required, and otherprops is not acceptable 
as a workaround).

But I also feel a 
bit twitchy about having a section of the specification that effectively 
introduces a continuum of compliance. I think we do need to talk about these 
issues, and certainly address them post-1.0, but maybe for 1.0 itself the 
discussion should take place in an external best practices document, where we 
are also planning to discuss relationships to other standards, etc.

Thoughts?

Michael Priestley

Dept PRG IBM Canada 
 phone: 416-915-8262
Toronto Information 
Development





  
  
    "Paul Grosso" 
      <> 
      12/07/2004 12:42 PM 
    
      
        
        
          
            To
          "DITA TC list " 
            <> 
        
          
            cc
          
        
          
            Subject
          [dita] Scoping DITA 1.0 
            [was: OASIS DITA TC: 07 December 2004 meeting 
        reminder]
  
        
        
          
          



I still prefer the minimalist approach to our 1.0 deliverable. 
When we
were discussing and voting 
on our charter, I understood that our
first deliverable--DITA 1.0--was pretty much going to be a "rubber
stamping" of the existing IBM standard 
and current practice with DITA.
We 
have a second deliverable with which to get more creative.
 
As much as I agree 
it would be worthwhile to expand the applicability
of DITA techniques beyond the scope of DITA 1.0, I don't feel 
that we
should do that in the1.0 
timeframe. I have been on too many standards 
committees that take so long to get out their first release 
that they
miss the optimal window 
of opportunity; I'd like to avoid that with DITA.
 
Before we get out 
our first deliverable, I would not spend time trying to
explain how to use specialization outside of the 
DITA tag set.  And I
would 
also leave to post-1.0 the enhancements to <tm> and <keyword>
below.
 
All that said, if 
the rest of those in the TC don't share my opinion, I'll bow 
to the majority on this. The last thing I want to 
do is add to the time to our 
first 
deliverable by spending another telcon on this issue.
 
paul



From: Don Day [mailto:] 

Sent: Tuesday, 07 December, 2004 9:21
To: DITA TC list 

Subject: [dita] OASIS DITA TC: 07 December 2004 meeting 
reminder


3. Specification status
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/download.php/10226/ditaspec.pdf
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/download.php/10225/ditaspec.chm
"issues for discussion in specification" (start from "Domains 
attribute")
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200411/msg00022.html

4. List issues (triage as potential post-1.0):
- Bugs reported 
on current DITA DTDs and Schemas
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200411/msg00023.html
- Should <tm> allow images or logoized content?
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200411/msg00024.html
- Should <keyword> be allowed to nest?
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200411/msg00025.html 














[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]