OASIS DocBook TC2

 View Only

Re: [docbook-tc] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Agenda: 28 June 2006

  • 1.  Re: [docbook-tc] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Agenda: 28 June 2006

    Posted 06-28-2006 14:44
     MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    docbook-tc message

    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


    Subject: Re: [docbook-tc] DocBook Technical Committee Meeting Agenda: 28 June 2006


    / "Bob Stayton" <bobs@sagehill.net> was heard to say:
    | 5. Review of open action items
    |
    |    a.  Norm and Bob to review and close any RFEs that should be closed.
    
    Not yet, alas.
    
    |    b.  Norm to add person and org elements to V5 Beta 6.
    
    Done.
    
    |    c.  (Norm?) Invite Dee to attend meeting regarding interop.
    
    Drat.
    
    |    d.  Norm to push 4.5 standardization process.
    
    Done.
    
    |    e.  Norm to add db.publishing.inlines to 5.0 bibliomixed.
    
    Done.
    
    |    f.  Nancy/Norm to find out if making the license more restricted
    |        is going to cause any heartburn.
    
    I looked it over and I think it's ok. Of course, IANAL.
    
    |     g. Norm to change content model of methodparam as proposed and allow
    |        xml:space on modifier.
    
    Done.
    
    |     h. Norm to write a more comprehensive proposal for numbering changes.
    
    Done.
    
    | 6.  DocBook 4.5 standards progress.
    
    We've balloted and I'll send in the stuff before 15 July. Then we need
    to get members to vote.
    
    | 7.  DocBook 5 issues.
    |
    | 8.  Proposal for more comprehensive numbering.
    
    Done, http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook/200606/msg00003.html
    
    | 9.  Units markup, see:
    |       http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/docbook-tc/200606/msg00000.html
    
    It's not obvious to me that this is something DocBook needs. I don't
    think we have enough use cases to justify trying to persuade the units
    TC one way or the other, but we can look at what they produce and see
    if we want to adopt it (or parts of it).
    
    I suspect that like the personal naming TC, it'll be much more
    complicated than we can usefully adopt. But we can certainly look.
    
                                            Be seeing you,
                                              norm
    
    -- 
    Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>      | Everything should be made as
    http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | simple as possible, but no simpler.
    Chair, DocBook Technical Committee |
    

    PGP signature



    [Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]