[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]