Typos and mistakes in the References topics

I agree that it is useful (and necessary) to
indicate whether something is a recommendation or a working draft; I
have made those changes. 

Most importantly, please let me know where you see typos and
"miscopies." (The format of your e-mail makes it very difficult to scan
and identify issues.)

Other comments:

  
I have not replaced the word "and" with an
ampersand"; standard industry (and Chicago Manual of Style)
conventions rule against this.

  
The titles of the specifications are marked
up using <cite> elements. This will render in italics in both PDF
and XHTML output.

  
We are not attributing trademarks. Only the
W3C -- and other organizations that attribute W3C trademarks would mark
the trademark in the title.

Thanks for your work on this,

Best,

Kris

Kristen James Eberlein

Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting

Secretary, OASIS DITA Technical Committee

Charter member, OASIS DITA Adoption Committee

www.eberleinconsulting.com

+1 919 682-2290; keberlein (skype) 

KrisOn 6/8/2010 4:28 PM, Bruce Nevin (bnevin) wrote:

  
  
  

  
OK, we're stuck
with a convention that makes it harder to distinguish the title from
the other parts of the reference. As you look further you'll see that
there are some content and markup issues in there too. For example,
saying that it is a recommendation or a working draft is more useful
and informative than merely repeating the title, as well as being an
accurate quotation of the identifying information within the cited
document; the convention makes no provision for either in association
with <organization> and <date> but maybe it's allowable.
There are a few typos or mis-copies. Using &amp; helps visually to
distinguish the list of editors from the title. It's too bad we can't
put the title in quotes--or can we? Should we use DITA markup for all
these content elements? I dealt only with the missing trademark sign,
needed in order accurately to quote the title of the XHTML
recommendation.

  
 

  
/Bruce

  

  

  

  
    

     From:
Kristen James Eberlein [mailto:] 

    Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 1:53 PM

    To: DITA TC

    Subject: Re: [dita] Groups - DITA 1.2 spec: CD 01, new
topics to review (new-topics-for-review.chm) uploaded

    

    

    Bruce, we need to use the conventions
specified in the sample OASIS specification:

    http://docs.oasis-open.org/templates/OASISSpecificationTemplateV4.1.html#A1-2

    

This convention is as follows:

<Author or editors>, <title>, <URL>,
<organization>, <date>

    

If any of your mechanical issues are OTHER than the order of the URL,
please let me know. (From a quick scan, it doesn't appear to be so.)

    

    Best,

    

    Kris

    

Kristen James Eberlein

Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting

Secretary, OASIS DITA Technical Committee

Charter member, OASIS DITA Adoption Committee

    www.eberleinconsulting.com

+1 919 682-2290; keberlein (skype)