OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

Groups - DITA 1.3: Why Three Editions? uploaded

  • 1.  Groups - DITA 1.3: Why Three Editions? uploaded

    Posted 10-29-2015 14:20
    Submitter's message Working draft 04 -- Kristen Eberlein Document Name : DITA 1.3: Why Three Editions? No description provided. Download Latest Revision Public Download Link Submitter : Kristen Eberlein Group : OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC Folder : Position Papers Date submitted : 2015-10-29 07:19:52 Revision : 3


  • 2.  Re: [dita] Groups - DITA 1.3: Why Three Editions? uploaded

    Posted 10-29-2015 18:36
    Hi, I like the current state of the piece.  I do have a couple of comments: 1)  in "Growth of DITA" you state that:  "Between DITA 1.1 and 1.2, the number of elements more than doubled" Between 1.1 and 1.2, elements went from 298 -> 535.  That's almost doubling, but not quite.  Did you mean from 1.0 -> 1.2?  Or should it be 'almost doubled' instead of 'more than doubled'?  2) Relating to the 'size of ...' sections (3.4, 4.4, 5.4)  Are we going with Tom's new charts on these sections?  If not, we need to at least make them consistent.   In the sizing  table, the  'number of document types' entry for 3.4 just has a number, which is fine.  But the 'document types' entry for 4.4 (technical content) lists:             • Base edition: 4             • Technical content edition: 11 which I find confusing, since the technical content edition includes all 15 of them. Then in 5.4 (all-inclusive), the entry says:             • Base: 4             • Technical content: 11             • Learning and training: 9 which I find much clearer. I'd recommend we take the 'edition' strings out of the document types section of the table in 4.4, if we publish it rather than or in addition to Tom's new graphics. Hopefully we can discuss Tom's graphics as either a substitute or supplement for the table on Tuesday, and close out discussion so we can publish this. Nancy _____________ Nancy Harrison Infobridge Solutions  nharrison@infobridge-solutions.com On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Kristen Eberlein < kris@eberleinconsulting.com > wrote: Submitter's message Working draft 04 -- Kristen Eberlein Document Name : DITA 1.3: Why Three Editions? No description provided. Download Latest Revision Public Download Link Submitter : Kristen Eberlein Group : OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC Folder : Position Papers Date submitted : 2015-10-29 07:19:52 Revision : 3


  • 3.  Re: [dita] Groups - DITA 1.3: Why Three Editions? uploaded

    Posted 10-29-2015 21:08
    See comments in blue <kje> tags below. Best, Kris Kristen James Eberlein Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee Principal consultant, Eberlein Consulting www.eberleinconsulting.com +1 919 682-2290; kriseberlein (skype) On 10/29/2015 2:36 PM, Nancy Harrison wrote: Hi, I like the current state of the piece.  I do have a couple of comments: 1)  in Growth of DITA you state that:  Between DITA 1.1 and 1.2, the number of elements more than doubled Between 1.1 and 1.2, elements went from 298 -> 535.  That's almost doubling, but not quite.  Did you mean from 1.0 -> 1.2?  Or should it be 'almost doubled' instead of 'more than doubled'?  <kje>Yes, should be between 1.0 and 1.2 -- Thanks for noting this.</kje> 2) Relating to the 'size of ...' sections (3.4, 4.4, 5.4)  Are we going with Tom's new charts on these sections?  If not, we need to at least make them consistent.   In the sizing  table, the  'number of document types' entry for 3.4 just has a number, which is fine.  But the 'document types' entry for 4.4 (technical content) lists:             • Base edition: 4             • Technical content edition: 11 which I find confusing, since the technical content edition includes all 15 of them. Then in 5.4 (all-inclusive), the entry says:             • Base: 4             • Technical content: 11             • Learning and training: 9 which I find much clearer. I'd recommend we take the 'edition' strings out of the document types section of the table in 4.4, if we publish it rather than or in addition to Tom's new graphics. <kje>Removed editions from 4.3, Size of the technical content edition . I hadn't thought that we were considering graphics for sections 3.4, 4.4, and 5.4; I just thought that we were considering the graphics for 2.3, Growth of DITA . </kje> Hopefully we can discuss Tom's graphics as either a substitute or supplement for the table on Tuesday, and close out discussion so we can publish this. <kje>Absolutely! We need to approve this no later than 10 November 2015.</kje> Nancy _____________ Nancy Harrison Infobridge Solutions  nharrison@infobridge-solutions.com On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Kristen Eberlein < kris@eberleinconsulting.com > wrote: Submitter's message Working draft 04 -- Kristen Eberlein Document Name : DITA 1.3: Why Three Editions? No description provided. Download Latest Revision Public Download Link Submitter : Kristen Eberlein Group : OASIS Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) TC Folder : Position Papers Date submitted : 2015-10-29 07:19:52 Revision : 3