DITA Technical Communication SC

  • 1.  Meeting regarding troubleshooting

    Posted 08-14-2013 21:56
      |   view attached
    Hi, I had a productive meeting with Michael Priestley, Kris Eberlein, and Robert Anderson regarding the troubleshooting topic. The chief outcome is that Michael and Robert agreed to abandon the requirement the new troubleshooting topic has to be structurally compatible the IBM troubleshooting specialization. Consequently, we are now able to offer our users a much tighter model for troubleshooting. What follows are the results of a quick collaboration on the call to tighten things up in the troubleshooting topic. troublebody begins with an optional condition element followed by one or more troubleSolution elements. The cause and remedy elements can no longer be direct children of troublebody. They must be wrapped inside of troubleSolution. This adds clarity to the model. troubleSolution begins with an optional cause element followed by a required remedy element cause and condition now begin with an optional title followed by a block mix (p, ol, table, ...). Direct text under cause and condition are no longer allowed, and title can only occur at the beginning of the element. remedy begins with an optional title, followed by an optional responsibleParty, then a required choice between steps and steps-unordered Michael and Kris were also pushing to have title removed from condition, cause, and remedy. I think that we ought to do this. How about you? I realize that it is presumptuous to make all of these changes. Normally, I would have to come to you first, but time is running out. Please let me know as soon as possible if you object to any of these changes or if you have questions about them. We definitely need to talk about the new model on Monday's call.  I have implemented the revised model as a DITA OT plugin, and it is attached. Best Regards, -- Bob Thomas +1 720 201 8260 Skype: bob.thomas.colorado Instant messaging: Gmail chat ( bob.thomas@tagsmiths.com ) or Skype Time zone: Mountain (GMT-7) Attachment: org.dita.13097troubleshooting14aug13_1538.zip Description: Zip archive

    Attachment(s)



  • 2.  Re: [dita-techcomm] Meeting regarding troubleshooting

    Posted 08-14-2013 22:53
    Hi Bob  Thinks for your dedication to this work. Generally I think the tightened model is well considered. However, I don't understand the rationale of eliminating the titles. Does that mean that processing has to add titles if the organization wants them to divide the parts?  Please explain how this would work and why titles are undesirable. JoAnn Sent from my iPad JoAnn Hackos Comtech Services Inc 710 Kipling Street Suite 400 Lakewood CO 80215 On Aug 14, 2013, at 5:55 PM, "Bob Thomas" < bob.thomas@tagsmiths.com > wrote: Hi, I had a productive meeting with Michael Priestley, Kris Eberlein, and Robert Anderson regarding the troubleshooting topic. The chief outcome is that Michael and Robert agreed to abandon the requirement the new troubleshooting topic has to be structurally compatible the IBM troubleshooting specialization. Consequently, we are now able to offer our users a much tighter model for troubleshooting. What follows are the results of a quick collaboration on the call to tighten things up in thetroubleshooting topic. troublebody begins with an optional condition element followed by one or more troubleSolution elements. The cause and remedy elements can no longer be direct children of troublebody. They must be wrapped inside of troubleSolution. This adds clarity to the model. troubleSolution begins with an optional cause element followed by a required remedy element cause and condition now begin with an optional title followed by a block mix (p, ol, table, ...). Direct text under cause and condition are no longer allowed, and title can only occur at the beginning of the element. remedy begins with an optional title, followed by an optional responsibleParty, then a required choice between steps and steps-unordered Michael and Kris were also pushing to have title removed from condition, cause, and remedy. I think that we ought to do this. How about you? I realize that it is presumptuous to make all of these changes. Normally, I would have to come to you first, but time is running out. Please let me know as soon as possible if you object to any of these changes or if you have questions about them. We definitely need to talk about the new model on Monday's call.  I have implemented the revised model as a DITA OT plugin, and it is attached. Best Regards, -- Bob Thomas +1 720 201 8260 Skype: bob.thomas.colorado Instant messaging: Gmail chat ( bob.thomas@tagsmiths.com ) or Skype Time zone: Mountain (GMT-7) <org.dita.13097troubleshooting14aug13_1538.zip> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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


  • 3.  Re: [dita-techcomm] Meeting regarding troubleshooting

    Posted 08-14-2013 23:11
    Hi JoAnn, There would  be a processing expectation that output stylesheets would insert generated text for titles upon output. This would be the same same sort of expectation that currently exists for elements in task such as prereq or context. The advantages to having the titles inserted by stylesheet are: Consistency Semantic enforcement. That is, an author couldn't drop a semantically mismatched title into an element like cause to use it for some other purpose. Simplified authoring Best Regards, Bob On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 4:52 PM, JoAnn Hackos < joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com > wrote: Hi Bob  Thinks for your dedication to this work. Generally I think the tightened model is well considered. However, I don't understand the rationale of eliminating the titles. Does that mean that processing has to add titles if the organization wants them to divide the parts?  Please explain how this would work and why titles are undesirable. JoAnn Sent from my iPad JoAnn Hackos Comtech Services Inc 710 Kipling Street Suite 400 Lakewood CO 80215 On Aug 14, 2013, at 5:55 PM, "Bob Thomas" < bob.thomas@tagsmiths.com > wrote: Hi, I had a productive meeting with Michael Priestley, Kris Eberlein, and Robert Anderson regarding the troubleshooting topic. The chief outcome is that Michael and Robert agreed to abandon the requirement the new troubleshooting topic has to be structurally compatible the IBM troubleshooting specialization. Consequently, we are now able to offer our users a much tighter model for troubleshooting. What follows are the results of a quick collaboration on the call to tighten things up in thetroubleshooting topic. troublebody begins with an optional condition element followed by one or more troubleSolution elements. The cause and remedy elements can no longer be direct children of troublebody. They must be wrapped inside of troubleSolution. This adds clarity to the model. troubleSolution begins with an optional cause element followed by a required remedy element cause and condition now begin with an optional title followed by a block mix (p, ol, table, ...). Direct text under cause and condition are no longer allowed, and title can only occur at the beginning of the element. remedy begins with an optional title, followed by an optional responsibleParty, then a required choice between steps and steps-unordered Michael and Kris were also pushing to have title removed from condition, cause, and remedy. I think that we ought to do this. How about you? I realize that it is presumptuous to make all of these changes. Normally, I would have to come to you first, but time is running out. Please let me know as soon as possible if you object to any of these changes or if you have questions about them. We definitely need to talk about the new model on Monday's call.  I have implemented the revised model as a DITA OT plugin, and it is attached. Best Regards, -- Bob Thomas +1 720 201 8260 Skype: bob.thomas.colorado Instant messaging: Gmail chat ( bob.thomas@tagsmiths.com ) or Skype Time zone: Mountain (GMT-7) <org.dita.13097troubleshooting14aug13_1538.zip> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -- Bob Thomas +1 720 201 8260 Skype: bob.thomas.colorado Instant messaging: Gmail chat ( bob.thomas@tagsmiths.com ) or Skype Time zone: Mountain (GMT-7)


  • 4.  [dita-techcomm] Unable to Attend Meeting today and Next Scheduled Meeting

    Posted 08-19-2013 14:48




    I will be unavailable for today’s meeting and next one (Labor Day in US)
     
    I support the changes made by Bob Thomas.
     
    Thanks.
     
    - Dave H.
     
    Dave Helfinstine
    DHelfinstine@ptc.com






  • 5.  Re: [dita-techcomm] Unable to Attend Meeting today and Next Scheduled Meeting

    Posted 08-19-2013 15:04
    WebEx is giving me issues. Trying to dial into the conference again. Jane --  Jane Credland Lead Writer, Data Center Group Technical Documentation Cisco Technical Communication Office Phone: 408-424-6468 From: <Helfinstine>, David < dhelfinstine@ptc.com > Date: Monday, August 19, 2013 7:48 AM To: " dita-techcomm@lists.oasis-open.org " < dita-techcomm@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: [dita-techcomm] Unable to Attend Meeting today and Next Scheduled Meeting ZH-CN X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 I will be unavailable for today’s meeting and next one (Labor Day in US)   I support the changes made by Bob Thomas.   Thanks.   - Dave H.   Dave Helfinstine DHelfinstine@ptc.com