dita — archive

FW: Responsible party

From: Kristen Eberlein
To: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 17:18:00 -0000

Best, Kris Kristen James Eberlein Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee Owner, Eberlein Consulting LLC [email protected] Skype: kriseberlein; voice: +1 (919) 622-1501 From: Dawn Stevens <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, March 24, 2023 2:50 PM To: Kristen James Eberlein <[email protected]> Subject: FW: Responsible party Hi Kris, I am getting this message. I believe it is because we just updated our domain [email protected] Although my other email works to receive, I think it is now saying this is who is sending the message so I don t have the right permission to post anymore. Here is the text of the message I wrote if you can forward it to the committee. And then, who do I need to ask to update my permissions to my new domain? Hi all, Kris and I had an action item to review <responsibleParty> in more detail and to suggest refinements to the description and examples. In working on this, we reached the conclusion that this element is semantically limiting to the type of content we might want to include in it. The purpose of the <remedy> element in troubleshooting is to provide stepped instructions for how to solve a problem. In some cases, however, this solution might be quite complex and require not only specific skills (currently placed into <responsibleParty>), but also specific equipment, tools, or parts. The current example in troubleshooting has a remedy to replace a board, if nothing else works. The steps for this procedure are conref d in. However, this procedure itself might require tools, such as a screwdriver, or equipment, such as an voltmeter, or the specific part number of the new board. We can t semantically justify putting that information in <responsibleParty>, but there is no other place for it to go. You might argue that the solution should be a reference to the whole task topic, rather than the conref, but if there is a reason to conref <steps> rather than cross-reference it, I would argue there might also be a reason to conref <prereq> as well. I would like to revisit the renaming of <responsibleParty>, but rather than rename it, I would suggest to remove it and instead use <prereq> in its place. The work has already been done to allow the reuse of the structural elements from task, it is semantically meaningful, and it doesn t require creating a new element and corresponding content model. Dawn From: Mail Delivery System < [email protected] > Date: Friday, March 24, 2023 at 12:45 PM To: [email protected] < [email protected] > Subject: Undeliverable: Responsible party This is the mail system at host lists.oasis-open.org. I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below. For further assistance, please send mail to postmaster. If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the attached returned message. The mail system < [email protected] >: permission denied. Command output: Sorry, only certain individuals may post to this committee. If you participate in this committee and have posting privileges, but are having trouble posting, please forward this error message to [email protected] (#5.7.2) ERROR: postqmail-local Error #77 --- Begin Message --- From : Dawn Stevens <[email protected]> To : "DITA Technical Committee ([email protected])" <[email protected]> Date : Fri, 24 Mar 2023 18:45:37 +0000 Hi all, Kris and I had an action item to review <responsibleParty> in more detail and to suggest refinements to the description and examples. In working on this, we reached the conclusion that this element is semantically limiting to the type of content we might want to include in it. The purpose of the <remedy> element in troubleshooting is to provide stepped instructions for how to solve a problem. In some cases, however, this solution might be quite complex and require not only specific skills (currently placed into <responsibleParty>), but also specific equipment, tools, or parts. The current example in troubleshooting has a remedy to replace a board, if nothing else works. The steps for this procedure are conref’d in. However, this procedure itself might require tools, such as a screwdriver, or equipment, such as an voltmeter, or the specific part number of the new board. We can’t semantically justify putting that information in <responsibleParty>, but there is no other place for it to go. You might argue that the solution should be a reference to the whole task topic, rather than the conref, but if there is a reason to conref <steps> rather than cross-reference it, I would argue there might also be a reason to conref <prereq> as well. I would like to revisit the renaming of <responsibleParty>, but rather than rename it, I would suggest to remove it and instead use <prereq> in its place. The work has already been done to allow the reuse of the structural elements from task, it is semantically meaningful, and it doesn’t require creating a new element and corresponding content model. Dawn --- End Message ---