[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita] Terminology for the DITA 1.2 spec
I could live with that terminology. Cheers, E. On 11/10/09 10:54 AM, "Bruce Nevin (bnevin)" <bnevin@cisco.com> wrote: > Eliot, in your discussion on the call you explained "concrete document > type" as a "working document type". Why not call it that? Instead of the > abstract/concrete distinction. > > /Bruce > > > ________________________________ > > From: Kristen James Eberlein [mailto:keberlein@pobox.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 11:36 AM > To: DITA TC > Subject: [dita] Terminology for the DITA 1.2 spec > > > As a follow-up to last week's TC meeting, a group of us had a > telephone call today to discuss (1) the terminology outlined in the > latest draft of the DITA 1.2 spec, and (2) reviewers' reactions to it. > > We discussed the following items: > > > * The fact that the DITA spec is a hybrid entity, a > mixture of normative information, commentary, and textbook material. > Given the time and resource constraints for DITA 1.2, as well as the > fact that other DITA resources are few and not widely available, this is > not going to change quickly. > > * The reality that the DITA TC includes people from > varying backgrounds (standards development, technical communication) and > that affects people's approach to the spec. > > * Organization of the terminology topic. Gershon is going > to attempt to create a logical ordering of the terms, if he can do so by > November 6. (If anyone has a interest in helping with this, contact > Gershon.) Our default will be to list the terms in alphabetical order. > > We did not get to the following items and suggest that they be > discussed at a regular TC meeting: > > > * Concrete document type > > * Do we need this term? Is it a widely accepted > term? > * How is a "Concrete document type" different from > a "DITA document type" > > > * Local shell > > * Content of <note> elements contentious > > > * Does the terminology apply to entire spec (including > Lang Ref topics) or only specific topics in the spec? > > For reference: > > > * CHM version of the most recent DITA 1.2 spec: > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/download.php/34300/dit > a1.2-spec-complete_20September2009.chm > To navigate to the Terminology topic, click > Architectural specification > Base > Introduction to DITA > Definitions > and background concepts > Terminology > > > <http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita/download.php/34300/di > ta1.2-spec-complete_20September2009.chm> > * Reviewers comments about the terminology topic: > > http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/IntroductionToDITA2#Terminology > > Best, > > Kris > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To > unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php > --
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]