Order for lang ref files (Was "Re: [dita] problem with packagingof glossaries")

Obviously, the files are currently sorted alphabetically. Do you have
an alternative that you would favor?

Best,

Kris

Michael Priestley wrote:

  Some potential users of the base
package:
  

  - people creating tools that work
with
simple content applications with minimal structure, like unstructured
blogs,
news feeds, web page components...
  

  - people who would otherwise not
read
the spec because it's too big, and can now be seduced into reading just
the first part, which provides a context that makes the rest less
intimidating
  

  

  Re the organization below - I'm not
sure about the order but the split looks right.
  

  

  Thanks for making this discussion
concrete.
  

  

  Michael Priestley, Senior Technical
Staff Member (STSM)

Lead IBM DITA Architect 



http://dita.xml.org/blog/25
  

  

  

  
    
      

        Kristen
James Eberlein
<> 
        
08/21/2009 10:33 AM
        

        
        
        
          
            

              
              
To

              
              DITA TC
<>
              
            

            

              
              
cc

              
              

              
            

            

              
              
Subject

              
              Re: [dita] problem
with packaging of
glossaries
            

          
        
        

        
          
            

              
              

              
              

              
            

          
        
        

        
      

    
  
  

  

  

  Two key issues:
  

  1.        Who
do we anticipate being the potential users of the base package?
  

  2.        Michael,
I want you to look at the current contents of the language reference
material
for both the base and technical content version. Is this as you have
been
envisioning it?

  

  
  

  Best,

  

Kris