dita — archive

Groups - DITA 1.3: Why Three Editions? uploaded

From: Nancy Harrison <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 18:36:00 -0000

Hi, I like the current state of the piece. I do have a couple of comments: 1) in "Growth of DITA" you state that: "Between DITA 1.1 and 1.2, the number of elements more than doubled" Between 1.1 and 1.2, elements went from 298 -> 535. That's almost doubling, but not quite. Did you mean from 1.0 -> 1.2? Or should it be 'almost doubled' instead of 'more than doubled'? 2) Relating to the 'size of ...' sections (3.4, 4.4, 5.4) Are we going with Tom's new charts on these sections? If not, we need to at least make them consistent. In the sizing table, the 'number of document types' entry for 3.4 just has a number, which is fine. But the 'document types' entry for 4.4 (technical content) lists: • Base edition: 4 • Technical content edition: 11 which I find confusing, since the technical content edition includes all 15 of them. Then in 5.4 (all-inclusive), the entry says: • Base: 4 • Technical content: 11 • Learning and training: 9 which I find much clearer. I'd recommend we take the 'edition' strings out of the document types section of the table in 4.4, if we publish it rather than or in addition to Tom's new graphics. Hopefully we can discuss Tom's graphics as either a substitute or supplement for the table on Tuesday, and close out discussion so we can publish this. Nancy _____________ Nancy Harrison Infobridge Solutions [email protected] On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Kristen Eberlein < [email protected] > wrote: Submitter's message Working draft 04 -- Kristen Eberlein Document Name : DITA 1.3: Why Three Editions? No description provided. Download Latest Revision Public Download Link Submitter : Kristen Eberlein Group : OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC Folder : Position Papers Date submitted : 2015-10-29 07:19:52 Revision : 3