Re: [dita] DITA 1.2 specification documents

Dear DITA TC,

The learning and training specialization
SC has discussed the packaging options for doc type shells.

Our consensus is that although we support
the notion of providing the full set of additional shells described below,
but we need the TC to clearly identify who is responsible for creating
and maintaining these shells. We question the feasibility of placing this
responsibility on a sub-committee.

Meeting minutes here - http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/dita-learningspec/200807/msg00007.html

I'll attend the meeting this Tuesday
to participate in any discussion about this.

John

___________________________________

John Hunt

DITA Architect / Lotus Information Development Center

Chair, OASIS DITA learning and training content sub-committee

IBM Software Group/Lotus Software



>>>>>

 Learning and
training generic: same as generic tech comm plus l&t topic types, domains,
and new map shell 

Learning and training SW: same as SW tech comm plus l&t topic types,
domains, 2 new map shells (map and bookmap with learning and classification
domains) 

Learning and training MI: same as l&t SW plus mitask with l&t domains

Publishing: bookmap (with xnal and utility domains)

Classification: two new map shells for taxo extensions (1 for taxo, 1 with
domain for referencing taxo) 

With the inclusion of hazard domains in SW, the difference between SW and
MI ends up just being the MITask - which raises the question whether we
couldn't choose to combine them into a single package. If we did that,
but maintained the generic form, we'd end up with this list:

Base: 1 topic shell, 1 map shell 

Generic tech comm: 4 topic shells, plus copy of base topic and map

Industry tech comm: 5 topic shells, plus copy of base map

Generic learning: 10 topic shells, 2 map shells (5 topic from tech comm
with map domains, plus 5 new topic, plus 2 new map)

Industry learning: 11 topic shells, 2 map shells (same as generic but with
SW domains and MITask added) 

>>>>>