RE: Action Item: additional normative and non-normative references

Thanks, Eliot. I’ve updated the spec content. We’ll need to get OASIS staff to review the format for the following references:

ANSI document
HTML5
Unicode Bidirectional Algorithm

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 Eliot Kimber
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2022 5:24 PM
To: dita <dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: [dita] Action Item: additional normative and non-normative references

Make a pass over the current state of the DITA 2.0 spec looking for any mentions of things for which there is something like a standard that governs it.

I did not identify any additional normative references, which is not a surprise since very little beyond the use of XML and URIs is normative by reference in DITA.

I identified the following specifications that should probably be added to the non-normative list:

XSLT3: XSL Transformations (XSLT) Version 3.0, Michael Kay, Editor. World Wide Web Consortium, 7 February 2017. This version is https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/CR-xslt-30-20170207/. The latest version is available at https://www.w3.org/TR/xslt-30/.
HTML5: https://html.spec.whatwg.org/, HTML Living Standard
WCAT: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1, https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/
UNICODE BIDIRECTIONAL ALGORITHM, https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr9/
HTML5 definition of the @dir attribute (to replace HTML 4.01 specification cited in current spec): https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/dom.html#the-dir-attribute
Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) 1.1 (Second Edition), https://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/. (There is an SVG 2 candidate recommendation, published October, 2018, but it appears to be unlikely to ever make it to Recommendation status.)
ANSI Z535.6-2011 (R2017), Product Safety Information In Product Manuals, Instructions And Other Collateral Materials

Note that HTML5 is a slippery beast as it’s no longer a W3C specification (the W3C formally agreed to participate in the WHATWG to contribute to HTML 5 development) and there’s no single thing to cite except the WHATWG web site itself, which is what I’ve done here. All other forms of HTML appear to be effectively obsolete from a standards standpoint since the only thing that really matters is what browsers implement, which means what the WHATWG documents.

Cheers,

_____________________________________________

Eliot Kimber

Sr Staff Content Engineer

O: 512 554 9368

M: 512 554 9368

servicenow.com

LinkedIn | Twitter | YouTube | Facebook

dita message