Title: [dita] Release Management Domain: Must apply to maps as
well as topics
FYI
Best,
Kris
Kristen James Eberlein
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting
www.eberleinconsulting.com
+1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject:
FW: [dita] Release Management Domain: Must apply to maps
as well as topics
Date:
Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:22:32 +0000
From:
Thomas Cihak <>
To:
Kristen James Eberlein
<>, Day Don-B39315
<>
CC:
JoAnn Hackos <>
Hi
Kris and Don,
I
‘replied all’ to JoAnn’s email but got a message that it was
rejected by the dita list.
with
best regards
Tom
Cihak
Digital
Networking Information Development
Freescale
512.895.3063
From:
Cihak Thomas-R65612
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 12:19 PM
To: 'JoAnn Hackos'; Hudson, Scott
Cc: Eliot Kimber; dita
Subject: RE: [dita] Release Management Domain:
Must apply to maps as well as topics
The
wording ‘at the topic level’ was in no way intended to limit
the use of the domain to topics; it was merely to emphasize
that the release notes were to be recorded in the same file
where the changes were made (rather than in a spreadsheet or
separate topic or file).
If
we change the wording to this:
“…enables
content workers to log comments and metadata at the topic or
map level….”
Is
this sufficient?
btw,
here’s the text of one of Eliot’s emails to me when he
helped me with the domain integration:
The
domain as I specified it can be used with both maps and
topics because change-historylist is specialized from
<metadata>, which is allowed only in <prolog>
and <topicmeta>.
Cheers,
E.
Thank
you.
with
best regards
Tom
Cihak
Digital
Networking Information Development
Freescale
512.895.3063
From:
[mailto:]
On Behalf Of JoAnn Hackos
Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 11:16 AM
To: Hudson, Scott
Cc: Eliot Kimber; dita
Subject: Re: [dita] Release Management Domain:
Must apply to maps as well as topics
We need to hear from Tom Cihak.
Sent from my iPad
JoAnn Hackos
Comtech Services Inc
710 Kipling Street Suite 400
Lakewood CO 80215
CIDM will
be hosting the Content Management Strategies/DITA North
America conference in April 2013.
On Mar 8, 2014, at 9:14 PM, "Hudson, Scott" <>
wrote:
Sounds reasonable to me.
--Scott
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 8, 2014, at 2:55 PM, "Eliot Kimber" <>
wrote:
Proposal 13102 as
written says:
"enables content workers to log comments and
metadata at the topic level
when changes are made."
The implicit restriction to topics is not necessary:
there's no reason not
to allow revision history within maps and no
technical reason to not use
it within maps (that is, <metadata>, the
specialization base of
<change-historylist>, is allowed within
<topicmeta>, so the domain is
inherently allowable within maps).
I take this to be a simple oversight on the part of
the original proposers
who were focused on topic-specific use cases. I
can't see any reason not
to allow the domain within maps and can think of
times when I would want
to use it in maps.
Does the TC object to adjusting the spec language to
explicitly allow use
of the domain within maps (which also implies
integrating the domain in
all non-base map types in addition to the non-base
topic types already
indicated in the proposal).
Cheers,
Eliot
—————
Eliot Kimber, Owner
Contrext, LLC
http://contrext.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave
the OASIS TC that
generates this mail. Follow this link to all your
TCs in OASIS at:
https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email
Security.cloud service.
______________________________________________________________________
