RE: Tasktroubleshooting and machinery task

[kris eberleinconsulting.com <kris@eberleinconsulting.com>]

Hi, Dawn.

 

Regarding the fact that the machinery task does not include <tasktroubleshooting> -- that was an oversight.

 

Yes, we will update the grammar files for machinery task so that they are 2.0 compliant. I don’t see any difficulties with adding <tasktroubleshooting> at that time.

 

Best,

Kris

 

Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Owner, Eberlein Consulting LLC
kris@eberleinconsulting.com

Skype: kriseberlein; voice: +1 (919) 622-1501

 

From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> On Behalf Of Dawn Stevens
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2022 5:00 PM
To: DITA Technical Committee (dita@lists.oasis-open.org) <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] Tasktroubleshooting and machinery task

 

I don’t work with the machinery task often but I have a current client who is using it. We noted that it does not include <tasktroubleshooting>. It of course allows for <steptroubleshooting> since that’s part of <step>. Was this an oversight or was there a reason not to have it? Is this whole question irrelevant because we won’t be supporting machinery task moving forward?

 

My understanding is that machinery task (and the L&T domain) DTDs will be updated for 2.0 conformance. So does that mean machinery task will have a 2.0 DTD that allows nested steps? And if we are doing that can we add <tasktroubleshooting>?

 

Or will all this need to be handled as a specialization?

 

Dawn