Stan, you could do something like the following:
<troubleshooting id="troubleshooting">
<title>Troubleshooting</title>
<troublebody>
<condition/>
<diagnostics>
<diagnostics-general/>
</diagnostics>
<troubleSolution>
<cause/>
</troubleSolution>
<troubleSolution>
<remedy>
<steps>
<step>
<cmd/>
</step>
</steps>
</remedy>
</troubleSolution>
</troublebody>
</troubleshooting>
Best,
Kris
Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Owner, Eberlein Consulting LLC
kris@eberleinconsulting.com
Skype: kriseberlein; voice: +1 (919) 622-1501
-----Original Message-----
From: dita@lists.oasis-open.org <dita@lists.oasis-open.org> On Behalf Of Dr. Stanley Doherty
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 9:22 AM
To: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [dita] ACTION ITEM: Another Troubleshooting Example
Hi --
I had an action item from last week to develop a troubleshooting example that:
a. Made use of the DITA 2.0 troubleshooting grammar.
b. Followed the traditional troubleshooting workflow of:
<condition> - symptom description
<diagnostics> - how to collect relevant info
<cause> - root cause analysis
<remedy> - probable fixes
The DITA 2.0 troubleshooting grammar subordinates <cause> and <remedy> under <troubleSolution>.
<condition> - symptom description
<diagnostics> - how to collect relevant info
<troubleSolution>
<cause> - root cause analysis
<remedy> - probable fixes
</troubleSolution>
I cannot develop an example where <condition>, <diagnostics>, <cause>, and <remedy> are workflow peers. At this point, I recommend going with the example currently in the spec.