Mary,
The DITA 1.1 Architecture Specification
includes the following statement:
The
specification consists of:
·
The DTDs and schemas that
define DITA markup for the base DITA document types, as well as catalog files.
While the DTDs and schemas should define the same DITA elements, the DTDs are
normative if there is ever any discrepancy.
·
The language reference that
provides explanations for each element in the base DITA document types
·
This document, which has
the following parts:
–
an introduction, which
provides background concepts and an overview of the architecture
–
the DITA markup
specification, which provides an overview of DITA’s base document types
–
the DITA processing
specification, which provides descriptions of common DITA processing expectations
–
the DITA specialization
specification, which provides details of the mechanisms DITA provides for defining
and extending DITA document types.
I expect that the DITA 1.2 specification
documents will use the same approach. Each document will include a statement
similar to the one from DITA 1.1 (but longer since there are more documents). Each
DITA 1.2 document will include the front matter required by OASIS much as was
done for the DITA 1.1 Architecture and Language References specs. All of the
DITA 1.2 components (a PDF for each specification document, plus DTD and XSD
modules, and catalog files) will be collected and available for download in a
single .zip archive file. This should allow the entire DITA 1.2 specification
to be publicly reviewed and eventually approved with a single ballot much as
was done for DITA 1.1 and DITA 1.0.
Does this seem correct to you?
-Jeff
From: Mary McRae
[mailto:] On Behalf Of Mary
McRae
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 12:06
PM
To: Ogden, Jeff;
Subject: RE: [dita] DITA 1.2
specification documents
Hi Jeff et al,
This list
looks great – just remember that you’ll either need to produce a
single document called “DITA 1.2” that will then contain the
requisite front matter and listing of each of the separate components (think intro
section to a multi-volume set); or each of these will become a
separately-balloted stand-alone specification/standard.
Obviously you
can combine *some* of the pieces
into the main DITA 1.2 document and leave others to stand alone as appropriate
as well.
I know
I’ve brought it up before, but I just don’t want to see the process
delayed once you’re ready to go to public review J
All the best,
Mary
From: Ogden, Jeff
[mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 10:58
AM
To:
Subject: [dita] DITA 1.2
specification documents
Here is the list of
planned DITA 1.2 specification documents as of the last time we talked about
this.
a) DITA 1.2
Base Architectural Specification (introduction, topic, map, and metadata
markup, processing including delayed resolution, specialization including
constraints).
b) DITA 1.2
Base Language Reference (map, topic, metadata including delayed resolution, map
group domain).
c) DITA 1.2
Utility Domain Specializations Architecture and Language Reference (utilities,
highlighting, and hazard statement domains).
d) DITA 1.2
xNAL Domain Specializations Architecture and Language Reference.
e) DITA 1.2
Technical Content Architecture and Language Reference (concept, task,
reference, glossary).
f)
DITA 1.2 Software, Programming, and User Interface Domains
Specializations Architecture and Language Reference.
g) DITA 1.2
Book Architecture and Language Reference (bookmap).
h) DITA 1.2
Learning and Training Content Architecture and Language Reference.
i)
DITA 1.2 Machine Industry Architecture and Language Reference.
j)
DITA 1.2 Semantic Linking, Controlled Values, and Taxonomies
Architecture and Language Reference.
k) DITA
1.2 Processing Guidelines and Examples (non-normative).
Item (e) might or might not be renamed.
Item (f) might or might not have some doctype shells added.
I would still like to create item (k), but suspect that we
should drop it from the DITA 1.2 work and do it later as a “best
practice” or similar document that is non-normative and outside of the
DITA 1.2 Specification.
Given recent discussions it is possible that we may want to
combine some of these items, but exactly how isn’t clear to me at this
point.
-Jeff
