[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: MEETING MINUTES -- 19 Apr 2005 -- DITA TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES -- 19 Apr 2005 -- DITA TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
*** Please see Action Items and Decision Summary at the end ***
** Agenda **
------------
Main things for today:
- TC administrivia
- Resume review of "post 1.0" requirements for public review.
1. Roll call
2. Review/approve minutes from 5 April (no meeting 12 April):
- http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200504/msg00036.html
3. Discuss different meeting day/time for next phase
4. CD in ballot for your organization's primary representative:
-
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/200504/msg00009.html
5. Resume review of "post 1.0" requirements for public review.
6. More on "OASIS Website" thread?
7. More on "Marketing/Press relations" thread?
8. AOB
** Minutes **
-------------
Main things for today:
- TC administrivia
- Resume review of "post 1.0" requirements for public review.
1. Roll call
- We do have quorum!
2. Review/approve minutes from 5 April (no meeting 12 April):
- http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200504/msg00036.html
- Minutes approved by acclamation.
3. Discuss different meeting day/time for next phase
- Decision: No change
4. CD in ballot for your organization's primary representative:
-
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/200504/msg00009.html
- Find the rep for your group in the list of voting members
referenced in the URL above. It's important to get that
person to register a vote for DITA.
- See this link --
-
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/200504/msg00007.html
- If you follow the ballot link, it will show you what votes
have been cast so far. The link is copied here for
convenience --
-
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/voting/ballot.php?id=746
5. Resume review of "post 1.0" requirements for public review.
- URL:
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/download.php/12127/DIT
A-TC-1dot1issues-1.htm
- Continuing with number 29
- Issue 29 -- Extensible metadata attributes
- Identical to item 47
- Full solution is probably a 2.0 issue, since it
may cause backwards-compatibility issues
- But can we do something for 1.1?
- Priestley -- yes we need to do something
- Day -- shall we make a recommendation on how
to create values?
- Priestley -- no, that's already in the 1.0
spec. There is a real need to add new
attributes. That doesn't mean we should add
the ability to add *any* metadata, because
that would go outside of scope.
- No disagreement -- we'll keep for 1.1.
- Issue 30 -- Formal "component" or "fragment" element
specially designed as source content for CONREF.
- I couldn't capture the discussion.
- This is more a best-practice issue for content
reuse. As such, yes we can include it in the
scope for 1.1.
- So, we'll keep it with a new name -- Best practice
for content reuse.
- Issue 31 -- Side-by-side implementation of xml:id?
- I couldn't capture the discussion.
- Let's keep it on the list for 1.1 and keep
discussing it.
- Issue 32 -- Should <refsyn> be moved to a domain, e.g.
Programming or Software?
- This is a change to a topic-level specification
- Again, couldn't capture the discussion.
- This item is dependent on item 39.
- Item 39 needs to be done in order for this one to
be done.
- So, whether we accept #32, depends on whether we
accept #39.
- Issue 33 -- DATA element
- Erik Hennum -- Extensible addition of values with
a semantic but particular processing instructions
associated with it.
- For example, metadata values
- Or hybrid data-and-discourse documents,
such as an insurance claim form
- Priestley -- You sometimes want to keep the data
there in the document, but hide it from the
human-readable output.
- Day -- 1.1 scope item? Or too ambitious and move
to 2.0?
- Priestley -- Shouldn't take much to implement.
Will appear everywhere "keyword" exists. It's
optional everywhere, so it will not have any
backward-compatibility issues.
- Day -- No other discussion, so we'll keep this for
the 1.1 spec. Need more explanation though.
- Issue 34 -- Support for foreign content vocabularies such
as MathML and SVG
- It's been on the list for the past two weeks
- Hennum -- This element gives us the ability to
have inline objects. It's not appropriate, for
example, to specialize <unknown> to include
text-based content. The idea is to be able to
ignore the <unknown> element and use replacement
text instead.
- Day -- Any reasons to exclude from 1.1?
- No reasons, so we'll keep for 1.1.
- Issue 35 -- Extensible metadata by expressing data in map
structures
- Seems to be in scope for 1.1, so we'll keep it for
1.1.
- Issue 36 -- Reconciling topic <link> and map <topicref>
elements
- Hennum -- This can create problems for
specialization because you have to specialize for
both sides.
- Priestley -- Concerned that it might take a lot to
support the transforms for this
- Day -- Is it too much for 1.1?
- Priestley -- Not sure
- Day -- Move to post-1.1?
- Hennum -- Creates specialization issues, but can
live with it.
- Keep for 1.1, but identify it as high-risk, maybe
drop later -- possibly high risk, high cost (for
the transform)
- Issue 37 -- bookmap / bkinfo revision
- Keep for 1.1
- Issue 38 -- Policy-based style mechanism
- Dependent on issue 37
- Day -- probably too much to do this and 37 both in
the 1.1 spec
- Keep for 1.1
- Issue 39 -- Integration of domain elements with structural
elements of the topic
- Hennum -- No impact to existing content
- Related to issue 46
- Keep for 1.1 -- let's at least look at it for 1.1
- We'll continue next week with Issue 40.
- We need to finish this list by the end of the
month!
6. More on "OASIS Website" thread?
- Not covered -- no time
7. More on "Marketing/Press relations" thread?
- Not covered -- no time
8. AOB
- Not covered -- no time
** Summary of Decisions **
--------------------------
- Decided to keep the meeting at the same weekly timeslot.
- Decided on the 1.1 issues list -- Issues 29-39 -- see details
in minutes, above.
** Action Required **
---------------------
022 Don, Michael -- Put together a "self-study" tutorial/demo,
as per JoAnn's comments regarding the DITA sessions. Still
pending as of 7/20/04.
062 Eric Sirois, 10/05/04 -- provide XSLT validation for
specialized schemas once developed (Indi recommends Jarno to
work with him) >>> 1/25/05 -- this will be an ongoing
project; the 1.0 spec does not depend on this.
079 Don Day, 2/8/05 -- Ask Mary Macrae about several issues --
- How can the public submit comments on the CD? Can we
get a mailing list set up? etc.
- What are the constraints for the final format of the
CD?
080 All, 2/8/05 -- Remove comments from the CD.
081 All, 2/8/05 -- Will there be a .chm version of the CD files?
082 All, 3/8/05 -- Submit comments to Michael Priestley on the
Architecture Specification.
085 Michael Priestley, 3/15/05 -- provide the HTML format as
part of the spec (to be done after the submission).
086 Who?, 3/15/05 -- Need to submit the committee draft 2 to the
OASIS administration for approval.
087 3/29/05 -- Ask JoAnn Hackos if she wants to continue
in her role as co-Editor with Michael Priestley.
088 Chris Kravogel, 3/29/05 -- Expand "Keyword" issue (on the
Issues List) to (A) Semantics and (B) Nesting. CLOSED
4/5/05.
089 Chris Kravogel, 3/29/05 -- Add the rest of Michael's issues
to the Issues List (which Michael sent by email to the TC
List). CLOSED 4/5/05.
090 (placeholder)
** Issues to be Resolved **
---------------------------
009 "Best Practices" document -- Let's put this on the agenda
for future discussion.
010 Relationship between DITA and other topic-based
architectures (such as S1000D) -- Need to incorporate this
into the "Best Practices" document.
012 All, 2/8/05 -- Decide how to manage incoming comments
resulting from the Public Review of the Committee Draft.
013 Need volunteer to find mentions of "post 1.0" deferred items
-- need to rank by priority and difficulty) solid things for
1.1; medium effort design work candidates for 1.2; big items
for 2.0 in minutes (3/8/05).
014 (3/29/05) Need list of possible "triage" criteria for
deciding how to prioritize new requirements. Don read
a list of possible criteria at the 3/29/05 meeting. To be
discussed and resolved at the next meeting.
015 (placeholder for next)
<END>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]