Groups - 12March2013Minutes.txt modified

Submitter's message

        Minutes, DITA Technical Committee, March 12 2013

Scribe: Don Day

Chaired by Kris Eberlein

Speakers during today's call: 

	KE: Kris Eberlein

	RA: Robert Anderson

	DD: Don Day

	JH: JoAnn Hackos

	SD: Stan Doherty

Actions:

Don-- change April 14 to no meeting

   -- take Seth Park off (and with Adrian, easily gives us quorum)

Regrets: JoAnn Hackos, Michael Boses, Thilo Buchholz, Eliot Kimber

Kris asked about April 14 meeting; TC agreed to cancel meeting on that date

* Approval of Minutes from last business meeting (5 March taken by Dick Hamilton):

Moved: by KE

Seconded: MP

Objections: none, approved by acclamation

* Report from the Machine Industry Subcommittee: Kravogel not present -- try for next week

BUSINESS:

'''DITA 1.3 progress'''

Mark Myers sent 13089 to TecComm SC for their review; back in 2 weeks after April 4

'''Stage 2 proposals'''

 * Continuing discussion on proposal 13056: New attribute groups for filtering (Anderson)

	Robert reviewed outline of points. Kris asked for questions--none

	Robert motioned to move this to stage 3. K: any objections? none

ra: y

mp: y

aw; y

dh: y

dd: y

KE: y

TM: y

DB: y

CN: y

DH: y

SH: y

Unanimous, motion carries. Deb Bissantz and Dick Hamilton and Kris Eberlein will review.

 * Stage 2 vote on proposal 13107: Effective default values for scope, format, and type attributes (Nitchie)

Kris asked about status of conversations. Seems to be resolved:

RA: Y

MP: y

Aw: y

dh y

dd y

ke y

tm y

db y

cn y

dh y

sh y

Unanimous, motion carries. Reviewers: Dave Helfenstine, Robert Anderson

Kris asked for reviewers for learninggroupmap 13089; Scott Hudson will review, Mark Myers, who suggests Eliot might also.

''Stage 3:

 * 13089

'''item 4: Discussion before format stage-2:

 * Pre-proposal discussion on 13115: Make DITAVAL aware of subject schemes (Anderson)

	Robert gave overview of email: use case of filtering values in an associated subject scheme. Need to make this explicit during processing of a file. there is a spurious "must" statement that he recommends removing (for case of standing taxonomies). This becomes a content update rather than a technical proposal. KE asked if a replacement phrase was needed; Robert thinks a variety of options can be listed, but thinks the standing scheme should not be prohibited. Perhaps change language in examples section to show options. TC agrees; this will be added to editorial changes.

 * Pre-proposal discussion on 13121: Reusing portions of structural specializations via domain mechanism (Priestley) 

	MP gave overview of email: goal is to allow reuse parts in other specializations (use the domain mechanism to treat that portion as a domain). MP has a partial answer; should be able to reuse part as suggested, but not as a free domain element--must integrate directly into structural specializations.  thinks reuse of domains in structural specializations now needs some work to clean up interpretation of how the structural parts will work. 

1-Generalization: we would not be able to allow steps everywhere that ol is used (association to more general form): is it a structure, or a domain? Still needs to add examples. Effect on conref--thinks it should work fine according to existing structural specialization context rules. Don asked about complexity; low impact for designer, but doctype will now have more unused elements in it (must read in that structural mod file). 

2-Strong/Weak: MP will continue with documentation and looking into some issues that are now opened for scrutiny. IE, in constraints section, there is no clear explanation about strong and weak constraint resolution (this needs to be in the lightweight DITA, for certain). Robert thinks this last one should go into Doc Fixes for sure. Robert will update the table to reflect this observation.

3-On constraints, sees a need for easier global redefinition of entities as a constraint method. Robert: we had to declare before entities are declared, but we can't use an entity before it is declared. thus we have ent files for domains. MP: hopes there is still a way to do it. This still needs technical design work.

4-In generalization section, the comment on "auto-generation" seems no longer feasible. Now that structural topic types are also in the domains list, there could be impact (but RA says don't worry)

Still, the claim that a shell can be generated from info in domains attribute no longer holds true. Wants Eliots opinion. (Don: Elovirta's generator use this? NO, sy ra and mp--he's working within known problem space.) RA thinks the original language was Eliot's, so we definitely need his review on MP's assertions. Kris suggest we have this on next week's agenda

5-Syntax for structural specializations with hard dependencies on domains is not documented, although examples exist but are not good examples. DITA Adoption TC white paper has other examples. MP's guess is that this is a documentation hole. RA: thinks this is from Erik Hennum who may have missed the main case in the midst of working on edge cases. RA: This is a complex doc fix; needs deep consideration by experts. Kris will put this on next week's agenda.

Resume next week

        

-- Don Day
        
    

    
        Document Name: 12March2013Minutes.txt

        
        No description provided.        

        Download Latest Revision

        Public Download Link
        
        Submitter: Don Day

                Group: OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC

        Folder: Meeting Notes

        Date submitted: 2013-03-19 06:40:34

                Revision: 0