RE: [dita] Name for the TechComm/Technical Content spec

Aye. Technical Content makes the most sense.

 

Cheers,

 

Rob Hanna

President and Co-founder

Precision Content
(t) 647-265-8282

======================================================================

 

From:  <>
On Behalf Of Bill Burns

Sent: May 21, 2019 12:50 PM

To: Magliery Tom <>; Carlos Evia <>

Cc: Scott Hudson <>; Debra Bissantz <>; Kristen James Eberlein <>; DITA TC <>

Subject: RE: [dita] Name for the TechComm/Technical Content spec

 

I second that.

 

Bill Burns

Content Architect | Healthwise

 |
www.healthwise.org

208.331.6917 (office)  |  208.345.1897 (fax)

 

 

From: 
 <>
On Behalf Of Magliery Tom

Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 1:35 PM

To: Carlos Evia <>

Cc: Scott Hudson <>; Debra Bissantz <>; Kristen James Eberlein <>;
 DITA TC <>

Subject: Re: [dita] Name for the TechComm/Technical Content spec

 

*** External email: use caution ***

I find Carlos's points compelling. I vote for Technical Content.

 

mag

 

 

On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 8:46 AM Carlos Evia <> wrote:

Dear people, 

 

I vote for Technical Content. For two reasons:

1- If we call it DITA for Technical Communication, that implies that without this package/section of the spec, DITA cannot or should not be used for technical communication. In reality, a simple DITA topic and even a
 LwDITA topic can do a lot for technical communication.

2- Technical communication, in industry and academia globally, means more than documentation or procedural content. 

So... I think technical communication and technical content are not the same, and DITA can work for both with or without this section of the spec. 

 

Best,

 

Carlos

-- 

Carlos Evia, Ph.D.

Associate Professor of Communication

Virginia Tech

Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112

(540)200-8201

 

 

 

On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 11:33 AM Scott Hudson <> wrote:

"DITA for Technical Communication Version 2.0" works for me too.

Thanks,

--Scott

ïOn 5/21/19, 8:24 AM, " on behalf of Debra Bissantz" < on behalf of
> wrote:

    I like "DITA for Technical Communication Version 2.0."

    Abbreviation suggestion: DITA_TC-v2.0

    Deb Bissantz | Applications Engineer

    Vasont Systems

    A TransPerfect Company

    t +1 717.793.3883

    Skype â live:dbissantz

    -----Original Message-----

    From:  [mailto:] On Behalf Of Kristen James Eberlein

    Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2019 10:47 AM

    To: DITA TC <>

    Subject: [dita] Name for the TechComm/Technical Content spec

    Guys, we need to decide on a name for the spec that contains CTR etc.

    I think that we've considered both "DITA for Technical Content Version 2.0" and "DITA for Technical Communication Version 2.0."

    We need to hammer this out, so that I can go ahead and request a template for OASIS. We should also decide on the work product abbreviation, which is used in the URLs and the citation format.

    Below is what is in place for DITA 2.0:

    URL (latest version): 

    
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__docs.oasis-2Dopen.org_dita_dita_v2.0_dita-2Dv2.0.html&d=DwIGaQ&c=P3aKjizb3qsxp0SERaL2sw&r=YQWdLfM9mekBOdoMmoBdn9RgyqIHrveGolBbb4_uGWQ&m=p2IDQI0fHhCrQMpG7FyyonGQ-vmcpheRG7DgR9_52js&s=hLWiYmDO59ioGE3n5wXgEzxNQDJyiNXSLHU4ewX2sBE&e=

    Work product abbreviation: DITA-v2.0

    --

    Best,

    Kris

    Kristen James Eberlein

    Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee

    Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting 
www.eberleinconsulting.com

    +1 919 622-1501; kriseberlein (skype)

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.oasis-2Dopen.org_apps_org_workgroup_portal_my-5Fworkgroups.php&d=DwIGaQ&c=P3aKjizb3qsxp0SERaL2sw&r=YQWdLfM9mekBOdoMmoBdn9RgyqIHrveGolBbb4_uGWQ&m=p2IDQI0fHhCrQMpG7FyyonGQ-vmcpheRG7DgR9_52js&s=SJl_uxUMAju9rP_m0bY03wbf8IV65MUnrqnc9jROryU&e=