> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grosso, Paul [mailto:]
> Sent: Monday, 2007 April 23 9:05
> To: DITA TC list
> Subject: [dita] Request for clarification of DITA Technical
> Committee Meeting Minutes: 17 April 2007
> Re:
>
> * Question about collection-type on reltable or relcolspec elements
> * http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200704/msg00008.html
>
> Discussion on the merits of making this change.
>
> Michael: We should clarify this in the 1.1 spec. Question is should
> we remove them in 1.2?
>
> Don is concerned about how this would look if we then
> rearchitect this in the future.
>
> DECISION: This will be treated as a 1.1 spec comment.
Unfortunately, I don't think I got as much clarity as I had
hoped for during today's telcon. Maybe I'm just missing
something obvious on this subject, but I think I need something
in writing.
My notes from today's telcon say this about what I heard:
The official word is that DITA 1.1 will not define what
it means to use the collection-type attribute on the
reltable element. It will be reserved for future use--and
presumably defined in DITA 1.2.
When I transmitted that back to the rest of Arbortext, I
was asked:
So in DITA 1.1 the use of collection-type is undefined on
both reltable and on relcolspec, but its use is defined
elsewhere including on relcell?
I have no idea what to answer.
It doesn't seem right that it's so hard for a TC member--much
less someone else--to figure out what our decision is in this
case especially after we've ostensibly discussed it at two
consecutive TC meetings.
Can we please get a definitively worded decision in writing?
Michael, I think you might be the best one to take a crack
at this. I don't mean spec-ese, I just mean what we decided
in layman's terms as the answers to the questions at
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita/200704/msg00008.html
paul
