Lightweight DITA SC

Ok dear LwDITA/FINCH/MAGMA2/LITA sub-comittee friends, Here’s a link to the first draft of our survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Following Jang’s recommendation, the survey has two branches based on the participant’s knowledge/awareness of DITA. There are gaps in language and terminology, of course, but that happens in first drafts. Please send comments and feedback. Best, Carlos - --  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201

I'll look at this over the weekend, as I already saw a couple of things that I would fix up. (Oh, those pesky content people!) But it's my pleasure to help get this as good as it can get. Rahel On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 7:42 PM, Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > wrote: Ok dear LwDITA/FINCH/MAGMA2/LITA sub-comittee friends, Here’s a link to the first draft of our survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Following Jang’s recommendation, the survey has two branches based on the participant’s knowledge/awareness of DITA. There are gaps in language and terminology, of course, but that happens in first drafts. Please send comments and feedback. Best, Carlos - --  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 -- Rahel Anne Bailie, Content Strategy & Ecosystems / Content Management & Design Content strategies for business impact  Mobile: +44 (0) 7869 643 685 / skype: rahelab Co-producer:  Content Strategy Workshops Co-editor: The Language of Content Strategy Co-author:  Content Strategy: Connecting the dots between business, brand, and benefits

My first thoughts - and thanks so much for pulling this together! How about this as a logic flow - trying to keep it mostly one stream, with skippable sections, rather than completely different branches. Assumptions: I think we're going after an audience that is already somewhat aware of LW DITA, and considering using it - those are the ones who can answer the questions we have. If we go after too broad an audience we'll just confuse them, and get unhelpful answers. 1. Are you familiar with Lightweight DITA?         yes - skip background         no - offer background (minimal, with links to more, and the suggestion that they should consider reviewing that material and then coming back) 2. Is your organization using DITA of any kind today?         yes - give list of roles for selection                 for each role selected, give option of providing up to 3 example URLs, with a field for the submitter to describe the content type                 eg: Type of content: ---- URL for example, if available: ----                 (note: non-technical sme shouldn't give marketing as an example since that's an explicit role - how about accountant?)         no - go to next question 3. Where are you considering using LW DITA?         list of roles again, again for each role have option of providing 3 content types and example urls 4. For the content you are considering LW DITA for, what authoring tools do you use today?         (should include XML editors, web cms forms) 5. Are you a tools developer?         yes - what formats do you need to accept as input?                 (markdown, json, html, word, etc.)                 and what formats do you need to provide as output?                 (above plus pdf, epub, etc.)         no - go to next question 6. Are you familiar with DITA specialization?         yes - skip to next question         no - give background 7. Are you familiar with LW DITA specialization?         yes - skip to next question         no - give background 6. The following elements in LW DITA provide the basic building blocks of content - more specialized forms of them can be created by the user through specialization. Is there anything missing from the basic list?           note: pre is for preformatted text, not prereqs 7. If we removed the following specialization capabilities from LW DITA, would it prevent your adoption?         if yes:         (needs to be multiple select)         - nestable containers (the div element in full DITA)         - attribute specializations off of base (any attributes that aren't metadata/props based)         - specialization from existing specializations (any specialization that isn't directly derived from topic and its elements)         - you've already removed a feature I need (write in)         if no (choice):         - I'm not planning to specialize         - or everything is fine, don't need those features 8. Given what you currently know about LW DITA, which of these potential benefits are important to you?         (list) 9. Can we contact you with follow up? One final thing - if we can add the ability to page back/forward in the survey, would make it easier to revisit earlier answers (and to review it :-) Thanks again Carlos, Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia <cevia@vt.edu> To:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         06/30/2016 02:40 PM Subject:         [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         <dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org> Ok dear LwDITA/FINCH/MAGMA2/LITA sub-comittee friends, Here’s a link to the first draft of our survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Following Jang’s recommendation, the survey has two branches based on the participant’s knowledge/awareness of DITA. There are gaps in language and terminology, of course, but that happens in first drafts. Please send comments and feedback. Best, Carlos --- Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201

Michael and all, Good feedback! I will give it some attention this weekend and have something ready for our call. Best, Carlos - --  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 6, 2016, at 4:19 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: My first thoughts - and thanks so much for pulling this together! How about this as a logic flow - trying to keep it mostly one stream, with skippable sections, rather than completely different branches. Assumptions: I think we're going after an audience that is already somewhat aware of LW DITA, and considering using it - those are the ones who can answer the questions we have. If we go after too broad an audience we'll just confuse them, and get unhelpful answers. 1. Are you familiar with Lightweight DITA?         yes - skip background         no - offer background (minimal, with links to more, and the suggestion that they should consider reviewing that material and then coming back) 2. Is your organization using DITA of any kind today?         yes - give list of roles for selection                 for each role selected, give option of providing up to 3 example URLs, with a field for the submitter to describe the content type                 eg: Type of content: ---- URL for example, if available: ----                 (note: non-technical sme shouldn't give marketing as an example since that's an explicit role - how about accountant?)         no - go to next question 3. Where are you considering using LW DITA?         list of roles again, again for each role have option of providing 3 content types and example urls 4. For the content you are considering LW DITA for, what authoring tools do you use today?         (should include XML editors, web cms forms) 5. Are you a tools developer?         yes - what formats do you need to accept as input?                 (markdown, json, html, word, etc.)                 and what formats do you need to provide as output?                 (above plus pdf, epub, etc.)         no - go to next question 6. Are you familiar with DITA specialization?         yes - skip to next question         no - give background 7. Are you familiar with LW DITA specialization?         yes - skip to next question         no - give background 6. The following elements in LW DITA provide the basic building blocks of content - more specialized forms of them can be created by the user through specialization. Is there anything missing from the basic list?           note: pre is for preformatted text, not prereqs 7. If we removed the following specialization capabilities from LW DITA, would it prevent your adoption?         if yes:         (needs to be multiple select)         - nestable containers (the div element in full DITA)         - attribute specializations off of base (any attributes that aren't metadata/props based)         - specialization from existing specializations (any specialization that isn't directly derived from topic and its elements)         - you've already removed a feature I need (write in)         if no (choice):         - I'm not planning to specialize         - or everything is fine, don't need those features 8. Given what you currently know about LW DITA, which of these potential benefits are important to you?         (list) 9. Can we contact you with follow up? One final thing - if we can add the ability to page back/forward in the survey, would make it easier to revisit earlier answers (and to review it :-) Thanks again Carlos, Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         06/30/2016 02:40 PM Subject:         [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Ok dear LwDITA/FINCH/MAGMA2/LITA sub-comittee friends, Here’s a link to the first draft of our survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Following Jang’s recommendation, the survey has two branches based on the participant’s knowledge/awareness of DITA. There are gaps in language and terminology, of course, but that happens in first drafts. Please send comments and feedback. Best, Carlos --- Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201

Dear all, Here’s a new version of the LwDITA survey that incorporates Michael’s comments: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ I still have to create some of the background texts, but I would love some feedback before I continue. Thanks a lot! Carlos - --  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 6, 2016, at 4:19 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: My first thoughts - and thanks so much for pulling this together! How about this as a logic flow - trying to keep it mostly one stream, with skippable sections, rather than completely different branches. Assumptions: I think we're going after an audience that is already somewhat aware of LW DITA, and considering using it - those are the ones who can answer the questions we have. If we go after too broad an audience we'll just confuse them, and get unhelpful answers. 1. Are you familiar with Lightweight DITA?         yes - skip background         no - offer background (minimal, with links to more, and the suggestion that they should consider reviewing that material and then coming back) 2. Is your organization using DITA of any kind today?         yes - give list of roles for selection                 for each role selected, give option of providing up to 3 example URLs, with a field for the submitter to describe the content type                 eg: Type of content: ---- URL for example, if available: ----                 (note: non-technical sme shouldn't give marketing as an example since that's an explicit role - how about accountant?)         no - go to next question 3. Where are you considering using LW DITA?         list of roles again, again for each role have option of providing 3 content types and example urls 4. For the content you are considering LW DITA for, what authoring tools do you use today?         (should include XML editors, web cms forms) 5. Are you a tools developer?         yes - what formats do you need to accept as input?                 (markdown, json, html, word, etc.)                 and what formats do you need to provide as output?                 (above plus pdf, epub, etc.)         no - go to next question 6. Are you familiar with DITA specialization?         yes - skip to next question         no - give background 7. Are you familiar with LW DITA specialization?         yes - skip to next question         no - give background 6. The following elements in LW DITA provide the basic building blocks of content - more specialized forms of them can be created by the user through specialization. Is there anything missing from the basic list?           note: pre is for preformatted text, not prereqs 7. If we removed the following specialization capabilities from LW DITA, would it prevent your adoption?         if yes:         (needs to be multiple select)         - nestable containers (the div element in full DITA)         - attribute specializations off of base (any attributes that aren't metadata/props based)         - specialization from existing specializations (any specialization that isn't directly derived from topic and its elements)         - you've already removed a feature I need (write in)         if no (choice):         - I'm not planning to specialize         - or everything is fine, don't need those features 8. Given what you currently know about LW DITA, which of these potential benefits are important to you?         (list) 9. Can we contact you with follow up? One final thing - if we can add the ability to page back/forward in the survey, would make it easier to revisit earlier answers (and to review it :-) Thanks again Carlos, Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         06/30/2016 02:40 PM Subject:         [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Ok dear LwDITA/FINCH/MAGMA2/LITA sub-comittee friends, Here’s a link to the first draft of our survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Following Jang’s recommendation, the survey has two branches based on the participant’s knowledge/awareness of DITA. There are gaps in language and terminology, of course, but that happens in first drafts. Please send comments and feedback. Best, Carlos --- Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201

On the content types, you should really say that the URLs are optional. It seems like it's required which would really turn some people off. On the question about specialisation it says: Are there are elements that you would consider important and are missing from this list? It should say under the text box or in brackets something like:  "If not, just click through to the next question". On the question: Which of the following specialization capabilities would you consider essential for your adoption of LwDITA? You've got an option which says: "You’ve already removed a feature that I need", which I think is trying to say "Other: _________" considering the wording of the question?   On 13 July 2016 at 14:41, Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > wrote: Dear all, Here’s a new version of the LwDITA survey that incorporates Michael’s comments: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ I still have to create some of the background texts, but I would love some feedback before I continue. Thanks a lot! Carlos - --  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 6, 2016, at 4:19 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: My first thoughts - and thanks so much for pulling this together! How about this as a logic flow - trying to keep it mostly one stream, with skippable sections, rather than completely different branches. Assumptions: I think we're going after an audience that is already somewhat aware of LW DITA, and considering using it - those are the ones who can answer the questions we have. If we go after too broad an audience we'll just confuse them, and get unhelpful answers. 1. Are you familiar with Lightweight DITA?         yes - skip background         no - offer background (minimal, with links to more, and the suggestion that they should consider reviewing that material and then coming back) 2. Is your organization using DITA of any kind today?         yes - give list of roles for selection                 for each role selected, give option of providing up to 3 example URLs, with a field for the submitter to describe the content type                 eg: Type of content: ---- URL for example, if available: ----                 (note: non-technical sme shouldn't give marketing as an example since that's an explicit role - how about accountant?)         no - go to next question 3. Where are you considering using LW DITA?         list of roles again, again for each role have option of providing 3 content types and example urls 4. For the content you are considering LW DITA for, what authoring tools do you use today?         (should include XML editors, web cms forms) 5. Are you a tools developer?         yes - what formats do you need to accept as input?                 (markdown, json, html, word, etc.)                 and what formats do you need to provide as output?                 (above plus pdf, epub, etc.)         no - go to next question 6. Are you familiar with DITA specialization?         yes - skip to next question         no - give background 7. Are you familiar with LW DITA specialization?         yes - skip to next question         no - give background 6. The following elements in LW DITA provide the basic building blocks of content - more specialized forms of them can be created by the user through specialization. Is there anything missing from the basic list?           note: pre is for preformatted text, not prereqs 7. If we removed the following specialization capabilities from LW DITA, would it prevent your adoption?         if yes:         (needs to be multiple select)         - nestable containers (the div element in full DITA)         - attribute specializations off of base (any attributes that aren't metadata/props based)         - specialization from existing specializations (any specialization that isn't directly derived from topic and its elements)         - you've already removed a feature I need (write in)         if no (choice):         - I'm not planning to specialize         - or everything is fine, don't need those features 8. Given what you currently know about LW DITA, which of these potential benefits are important to you?         (list) 9. Can we contact you with follow up? One final thing - if we can add the ability to page back/forward in the survey, would make it easier to revisit earlier answers (and to review it :-) Thanks again Carlos, Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         06/30/2016 02:40 PM Subject:         [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Ok dear LwDITA/FINCH/MAGMA2/LITA sub-comittee friends, Here’s a link to the first draft of our survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Following Jang’s recommendation, the survey has two branches based on the participant’s knowledge/awareness of DITA. There are gaps in language and terminology, of course, but that happens in first drafts. Please send comments and feedback. Best, Carlos --- Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 -- Noz Content Strategist, www.urbinaconsulting.com Co-Author of "Content Strategy: Connecting the dots between business, brand and benefits", www.thecontentstrategybook.com Landline +34 961 051 460 Mobile +34 625 467 866

Looking good to me - just a couple of nits on the logic, and input where requested on the authoring tools list: - the first question ends the survey rather abruptly for ignorants folks - maybe instead of a question we could just have a preamble that says "this survey assumes a basic level of knowledge of lwdita - you can find out more here, before taking the survey, if interested -. if you are already familiar with lw dita, click here to take the survey" - the question on knowledge of specialization didn't seem to trigger anything - I was still getting both specialization questions regardless of my answer - for the question on what authoring tool they use today - here's my ten cents:         - remove stone carving - it's a classic and will never go away, but not used by our target audience         - remove pencil and paper- that was a fad, we've all moved on         - add PPT         - add Excel         - add inDesign         - add "other" field Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia <cevia@vt.edu> To:         Michael Priestley/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA Cc:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         07/13/2016 02:37 PM Subject:         Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         <dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org> Dear all, Here’s a new version of the LwDITA survey that incorporates Michael’s comments: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ I still have to create some of the background texts, but I would love some feedback before I continue. Thanks a lot! Carlos --- Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 6, 2016, at 4:19 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: My first thoughts - and thanks so much for pulling this together! How about this as a logic flow - trying to keep it mostly one stream, with skippable sections, rather than completely different branches. Assumptions: I think we're going after an audience that is already somewhat aware of LW DITA, and considering using it - those are the ones who can answer the questions we have. If we go after too broad an audience we'll just confuse them, and get unhelpful answers. 1. Are you familiar with Lightweight DITA?        yes - skip background        no - offer background (minimal, with links to more, and the suggestion that they should consider reviewing that material and then coming back) 2. Is your organization using DITA of any kind today?        yes - give list of roles for selection                for each role selected, give option of providing up to 3 example URLs, with a field for the submitter to describe the content type                eg: Type of content: ---- URL for example, if available: ----                (note: non-technical sme shouldn't give marketing as an example since that's an explicit role - how about accountant?)        no - go to next question 3. Where are you considering using LW DITA?        list of roles again, again for each role have option of providing 3 content types and example urls 4. For the content you are considering LW DITA for, what authoring tools do you use today?        (should include XML editors, web cms forms) 5. Are you a tools developer?        yes - what formats do you need to accept as input?                (markdown, json, html, word, etc.)                and what formats do you need to provide as output?                (above plus pdf, epub, etc.)        no - go to next question 6. Are you familiar with DITA specialization?        yes - skip to next question        no - give background 7. Are you familiar with LW DITA specialization?        yes - skip to next question        no - give background 6. The following elements in LW DITA provide the basic building blocks of content - more specialized forms of them can be created by the user through specialization. Is there anything missing from the basic list?          note: pre is for preformatted text, not prereqs 7. If we removed the following specialization capabilities from LW DITA, would it prevent your adoption?        if yes:        (needs to be multiple select)        - nestable containers (the div element in full DITA)        - attribute specializations off of base (any attributes that aren't metadata/props based)        - specialization from existing specializations (any specialization that isn't directly derived from topic and its elements)        - you've already removed a feature I need (write in)        if no (choice):        - I'm not planning to specialize        - or everything is fine, don't need those features 8. Given what you currently know about LW DITA, which of these potential benefits are important to you?        (list) 9. Can we contact you with follow up? One final thing - if we can add the ability to page back/forward in the survey, would make it easier to revisit earlier answers (and to review it :-) Thanks again Carlos, Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         06/30/2016 02:40 PM Subject:         [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Ok dear LwDITA/FINCH/MAGMA2/LITA sub-comittee friends, Here’s a link to the first draft of our survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Following Jang’s recommendation, the survey has two branches based on the participant’s knowledge/awareness of DITA. There are gaps in language and terminology, of course, but that happens in first drafts. Please send comments and feedback. Best, Carlos --- Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201

Dear all, Here’s the most recent version of our LwDITA survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Thanks, Carlos - --  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 22, 2016, at 11:12 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: Looking good to me - just a couple of nits on the logic, and input where requested on the authoring tools list: - the first question ends the survey rather abruptly for ignorants folks - maybe instead of a question we could just have a preamble that says this survey assumes a basic level of knowledge of lwdita - you can find out more here, before taking the survey, if interested -. if you are already familiar with lw dita, click here to take the survey - the question on knowledge of specialization didn't seem to trigger anything - I was still getting both specialization questions regardless of my answer - for the question on what authoring tool they use today - here's my ten cents:         - remove stone carving - it's a classic and will never go away, but not used by our target audience         - remove pencil and paper- that was a fad, we've all moved on         - add PPT         - add Excel         - add inDesign         - add other field Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         Michael Priestley/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA Cc:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         07/13/2016 02:37 PM Subject:         Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Dear all, Here’s a new version of the LwDITA survey that incorporates Michael’s comments: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ I still have to create some of the background texts, but I would love some feedback before I continue. Thanks a lot! Carlos --- Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 6, 2016, at 4:19 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: My first thoughts - and thanks so much for pulling this together! How about this as a logic flow - trying to keep it mostly one stream, with skippable sections, rather than completely different branches. Assumptions: I think we're going after an audience that is already somewhat aware of LW DITA, and considering using it - those are the ones who can answer the questions we have. If we go after too broad an audience we'll just confuse them, and get unhelpful answers. 1. Are you familiar with Lightweight DITA?        yes - skip background        no - offer background (minimal, with links to more, and the suggestion that they should consider reviewing that material and then coming back) 2. Is your organization using DITA of any kind today?        yes - give list of roles for selection                for each role selected, give option of providing up to 3 example URLs, with a field for the submitter to describe the content type                eg: Type of content: ---- URL for example, if available: ----                (note: non-technical sme shouldn't give marketing as an example since that's an explicit role - how about accountant?)        no - go to next question 3. Where are you considering using LW DITA?        list of roles again, again for each role have option of providing 3 content types and example urls 4. For the content you are considering LW DITA for, what authoring tools do you use today?        (should include XML editors, web cms forms) 5. Are you a tools developer?        yes - what formats do you need to accept as input?                (markdown, json, html, word, etc.)                and what formats do you need to provide as output?                (above plus pdf, epub, etc.)        no - go to next question 6. Are you familiar with DITA specialization?        yes - skip to next question        no - give background 7. Are you familiar with LW DITA specialization?        yes - skip to next question        no - give background 6. The following elements in LW DITA provide the basic building blocks of content - more specialized forms of them can be created by the user through specialization. Is there anything missing from the basic list?          note: pre is for preformatted text, not prereqs 7. If we removed the following specialization capabilities from LW DITA, would it prevent your adoption?        if yes:        (needs to be multiple select)        - nestable containers (the div element in full DITA)        - attribute specializations off of base (any attributes that aren't metadata/props based)        - specialization from existing specializations (any specialization that isn't directly derived from topic and its elements)        - you've already removed a feature I need (write in)        if no (choice):        - I'm not planning to specialize        - or everything is fine, don't need those features 8. Given what you currently know about LW DITA, which of these potential benefits are important to you?        (list) 9. Can we contact you with follow up? One final thing - if we can add the ability to page back/forward in the survey, would make it easier to revisit earlier answers (and to review it :-) Thanks again Carlos, Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         06/30/2016 02:40 PM Subject:         [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Ok dear LwDITA/FINCH/MAGMA2/LITA sub-comittee friends, Here’s a link to the first draft of our survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Following Jang’s recommendation, the survey has two branches based on the participant’s knowledge/awareness of DITA. There are gaps in language and terminology, of course, but that happens in first drafts. Please send comments and feedback. Best, Carlos --- Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201

Hi Carlos, I don't know if you saw the edits that I did, but I'm not seeing them reflected in your survey. On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ - professions should be alphabetical - I edited the list to include some roles that I think are more likely to know/use LW DITA: Content designers Content developers Content editors Content strategists Customer support staff Embedded assistance authors Help/UA authors Marketing communicators Policy and procedure authors Product documentation authors Sales people Trainers - Non-technical Trainers - technical Software Designers Software Developers Support staff (Pas) Subject matter experts - non-technical (eg marketing) Subject matter experts - technical Other (specify) On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ This question seems very abrupt, and I wasn't clear about what it even meant. I think this needs to get moved down and have more context if you want quality answers. On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ You ask "Which content areas are you considering or would you consider Lightweight DITA for" but then the answers are a list of professions. Doesn't make sense. On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ The choices should be alphabetical (they mostly are), and I reframed it a little. Adobe InDesign Adobe FrameMaker Help Authoring Tool (if so, which one) HTML editor Markdown Microsoft Word XML editor Other (specify) On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Choices should be alphabetical. I have no other changes. On the past page, you may want to ask for a first name as well as an email address. (Otherwise, it seems a little cold.) That's my feedback. On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Carlos Evia  < cevia@vt.edu >  wrote: Dear all, Here’s the most recent version of our LwDITA survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Thanks, Carlos - --  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 22, 2016, at 11:12 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: Looking good to me - just a couple of nits on the logic, and input where requested on the authoring tools list: - the first question ends the survey rather abruptly for ignorants folks - maybe instead of a question we could just have a preamble that says "this survey assumes a basic level of knowledge of lwdita - you can find out more here, before taking the survey, if interested -. if you are already familiar with lw dita, click here to take the survey" - the question on knowledge of specialization didn't seem to trigger anything - I was still getting both specialization questions regardless of my answer - for the question on what authoring tool they use today - here's my ten cents:         - remove stone carving - it's a classic and will never go away, but not used by our target audience         - remove pencil and paper- that was a fad, we've all moved on         - add PPT         - add Excel         - add inDesign         - add "other" field Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         Michael Priestley/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA Cc:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         07/13/2016 02:37 PM Subject:         Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Dear all, Here’s a new version of the LwDITA survey that incorporates Michael’s comments: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ I still have to create some of the background texts, but I would love some feedback before I continue. Thanks a lot! Carlos ---  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 6, 2016, at 4:19 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: My first thoughts - and thanks so much for pulling this together! How about this as a logic flow - trying to keep it mostly one stream, with skippable sections, rather than completely different branches.  Assumptions: I think we're going after an audience that is already somewhat aware of LW DITA, and considering using it - those are the ones who can answer the questions we have. If we go after too broad an audience we'll just confuse them, and get unhelpful answers. 1. Are you familiar with Lightweight DITA?        yes - skip background        no - offer background (minimal, with links to more, and the suggestion that they should consider reviewing that material and then coming back) 2. Is your organization using DITA of any kind today?        yes - give list of roles for selection                for each role selected, give option of providing up to 3 example URLs, with a field for the submitter to describe the content type                eg: Type of content: ---- URL for example, if available: ----                (note: non-technical sme shouldn't give marketing as an example since that's an explicit role - how about accountant?)        no - go to next question 3. Where are you considering using LW DITA?        list of roles again, again for each role have option of providing 3 content types and example urls 4. For the content you are considering LW DITA for, what authoring tools do you use today?        (should include XML editors, web cms forms) 5. Are you a tools developer?        yes - what formats do you need to accept as input?                (markdown, json, html, word, etc.)                 and what formats do you need to provide as output?                (above plus pdf, epub, etc.)        no - go to next question 6. Are you familiar with DITA specialization?        yes - skip to next question        no - give background 7. Are you familiar with LW DITA specialization?        yes - skip to next question        no - give background 6. The following elements in LW DITA provide the basic building blocks of content - more specialized forms of them can be created by the user through specialization. Is there anything missing from the basic list?          note: pre is for preformatted text, not prereqs 7. If we removed the following specialization capabilities from LW DITA, would it prevent your adoption?        if yes:        (needs to be multiple select)        - nestable containers (the div element in full DITA)        - attribute specializations off of base (any attributes that aren't metadata/props based)        - specialization from existing specializations (any specialization that isn't directly derived from topic and its elements)        - you've already removed a feature I need (write in)        if no (choice):        - I'm not planning to specialize        - or everything is fine, don't need those features 8. Given what you currently know about LW DITA, which of these potential benefits are important to you?        (list) 9. Can we contact you with follow up?  One final thing - if we can add the ability to page back/forward in the survey, would make it easier to revisit earlier answers (and to review it :-) Thanks again Carlos, Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         06/30/2016 02:40 PM Subject:         [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Ok dear LwDITA/FINCH/MAGMA2/LITA sub-comittee friends, Here’s a link to the first draft of our survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Following Jang’s recommendation, the survey has two branches based on the participant’s knowledge/awareness of DITA. There are gaps in language and terminology, of course, but that happens in first drafts. Please send comments and feedback. Best, Carlos ---  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 --  Rahel Anne Bailie, Content Strategy & Ecosystems / Content Management & Design Content strategies for business impact  Mobile: +44 (0) 7869 643 685 / skype: rahelab Co-producer:  Content Strategy Workshops Co-editor:  The Language of Content Strategy Co-author:  Content Strategy: Connecting the dots between business, brand, and benefits

Dear Rahel, Thanks for the feedback. Some of the roles/terms in there came from your earlier message, but then I added from other people. I will revise and standardize. The survey does not give absolute URLs, so I don’t know which question is the one that seems abrupt (I have a few suspects, but don’t know which one you are pointing out). Can you clarify? The one about areas/roles is an excellent catch. That came from a change in terminology after a revision. Thanks a lot. Best, Carlos - --  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 25, 2016, at 2:55 PM, Rahel Anne Bailie < rahel.bailie@gmail.com > wrote: Hi Carlos, I don't know if you saw the edits that I did, but I'm not seeing them reflected in your survey. On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ - professions should be alphabetical - I edited the list to include some roles that I think are more likely to know/use LW DITA: Content designers Content developers Content editors Content strategists Customer support staff Embedded assistance authors Help/UA authors Marketing communicators Policy and procedure authors Product documentation authors Sales people Trainers - Non-technical Trainers - technical Software Designers Software Developers Support staff (Pas) Subject matter experts - non-technical (eg marketing) Subject matter experts - technical Other (specify) On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ This question seems very abrupt, and I wasn't clear about what it even meant. I think this needs to get moved down and have more context if you want quality answers. On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ You ask Which content areas are you considering or would you consider Lightweight DITA for but then the answers are a list of professions. Doesn't make sense. On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ The choices should be alphabetical (they mostly are), and I reframed it a little. Adobe InDesign Adobe FrameMaker Help Authoring Tool (if so, which one) HTML editor Markdown Microsoft Word XML editor Other (specify) On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Choices should be alphabetical. I have no other changes. On the past page, you may want to ask for a first name as well as an email address. (Otherwise, it seems a little cold.) That's my feedback. On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Carlos Evia  < cevia@vt.edu >  wrote: Dear all, Here’s the most recent version of our LwDITA survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Thanks, Carlos - --  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 22, 2016, at 11:12 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: Looking good to me - just a couple of nits on the logic, and input where requested on the authoring tools list: - the first question ends the survey rather abruptly for ignorants folks - maybe instead of a question we could just have a preamble that says this survey assumes a basic level of knowledge of lwdita - you can find out more here, before taking the survey, if interested -. if you are already familiar with lw dita, click here to take the survey - the question on knowledge of specialization didn't seem to trigger anything - I was still getting both specialization questions regardless of my answer - for the question on what authoring tool they use today - here's my ten cents:         - remove stone carving - it's a classic and will never go away, but not used by our target audience         - remove pencil and paper- that was a fad, we've all moved on         - add PPT         - add Excel         - add inDesign         - add other field Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         Michael Priestley/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA Cc:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         07/13/2016 02:37 PM Subject:         Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Dear all, Here’s a new version of the LwDITA survey that incorporates Michael’s comments: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ I still have to create some of the background texts, but I would love some feedback before I continue. Thanks a lot! Carlos ---  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 6, 2016, at 4:19 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: My first thoughts - and thanks so much for pulling this together! How about this as a logic flow - trying to keep it mostly one stream, with skippable sections, rather than completely different branches.  Assumptions: I think we're going after an audience that is already somewhat aware of LW DITA, and considering using it - those are the ones who can answer the questions we have. If we go after too broad an audience we'll just confuse them, and get unhelpful answers. 1. Are you familiar with Lightweight DITA?        yes - skip background        no - offer background (minimal, with links to more, and the suggestion that they should consider reviewing that material and then coming back) 2. Is your organization using DITA of any kind today?        yes - give list of roles for selection                for each role selected, give option of providing up to 3 example URLs, with a field for the submitter to describe the content type                eg: Type of content: ---- URL for example, if available: ----                (note: non-technical sme shouldn't give marketing as an example since that's an explicit role - how about accountant?)        no - go to next question 3. Where are you considering using LW DITA?        list of roles again, again for each role have option of providing 3 content types and example urls 4. For the content you are considering LW DITA for, what authoring tools do you use today?        (should include XML editors, web cms forms) 5. Are you a tools developer?        yes - what formats do you need to accept as input?                (markdown, json, html, word, etc.)                 and what formats do you need to provide as output?                (above plus pdf, epub, etc.)        no - go to next question 6. Are you familiar with DITA specialization?        yes - skip to next question        no - give background 7. Are you familiar with LW DITA specialization?        yes - skip to next question        no - give background 6. The following elements in LW DITA provide the basic building blocks of content - more specialized forms of them can be created by the user through specialization. Is there anything missing from the basic list?          note: pre is for preformatted text, not prereqs 7. If we removed the following specialization capabilities from LW DITA, would it prevent your adoption?        if yes:        (needs to be multiple select)        - nestable containers (the div element in full DITA)        - attribute specializations off of base (any attributes that aren't metadata/props based)        - specialization from existing specializations (any specialization that isn't directly derived from topic and its elements)        - you've already removed a feature I need (write in)        if no (choice):        - I'm not planning to specialize        - or everything is fine, don't need those features 8. Given what you currently know about LW DITA, which of these potential benefits are important to you?        (list) 9. Can we contact you with follow up?  One final thing - if we can add the ability to page back/forward in the survey, would make it easier to revisit earlier answers (and to review it :-) Thanks again Carlos, Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         06/30/2016 02:40 PM Subject:         [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Ok dear LwDITA/FINCH/MAGMA2/LITA sub-comittee friends, Here’s a link to the first draft of our survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Following Jang’s recommendation, the survey has two branches based on the participant’s knowledge/awareness of DITA. There are gaps in language and terminology, of course, but that happens in first drafts. Please send comments and feedback. Best, Carlos ---  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 --  Rahel Anne Bailie, Content Strategy & Ecosystems / Content Management & Design Content strategies for business impact  Mobile: +44 (0) 7869 643 685 / skype: rahelab Co-producer:  Content Strategy Workshops Co-editor:  The Language of Content Strategy Co-author:  Content Strategy: Connecting the dots between business, brand, and benefits

Oh, sorry about the URLs. The question that seems abrupt is the one right after the roles question, where you ask for content types and optional URLs. I just looked at it and wondered what I was supposed to do (because there was no preamble and content types is used in so many ways). Rahel On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > wrote: Dear Rahel, Thanks for the feedback. Some of the roles/terms in there came from your earlier message, but then I added from other people. I will revise and standardize. The survey does not give absolute URLs, so I don’t know which question is the one that seems abrupt (I have a few suspects, but don’t know which one you are pointing out). Can you clarify? The one about areas/roles is an excellent catch. That came from a change in terminology after a revision. Thanks a lot. Best, Carlos - --  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 25, 2016, at 2:55 PM, Rahel Anne Bailie < rahel.bailie@gmail.com > wrote: Hi Carlos, I don't know if you saw the edits that I did, but I'm not seeing them reflected in your survey. On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ - professions should be alphabetical - I edited the list to include some roles that I think are more likely to know/use LW DITA: Content designers Content developers Content editors Content strategists Customer support staff Embedded assistance authors Help/UA authors Marketing communicators Policy and procedure authors Product documentation authors Sales people Trainers - Non-technical Trainers - technical Software Designers Software Developers Support staff (Pas) Subject matter experts - non-technical (eg marketing) Subject matter experts - technical Other (specify) On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ This question seems very abrupt, and I wasn't clear about what it even meant. I think this needs to get moved down and have more context if you want quality answers. On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ You ask "Which content areas are you considering or would you consider Lightweight DITA for" but then the answers are a list of professions. Doesn't make sense. On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ The choices should be alphabetical (they mostly are), and I reframed it a little. Adobe InDesign Adobe FrameMaker Help Authoring Tool (if so, which one) HTML editor Markdown Microsoft Word XML editor Other (specify) On this page: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Choices should be alphabetical. I have no other changes. On the past page, you may want to ask for a first name as well as an email address. (Otherwise, it seems a little cold.) That's my feedback. On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Carlos Evia  < cevia@vt.edu >  wrote: Dear all, Here’s the most recent version of our LwDITA survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Thanks, Carlos - --  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 22, 2016, at 11:12 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: Looking good to me - just a couple of nits on the logic, and input where requested on the authoring tools list: - the first question ends the survey rather abruptly for ignorants folks - maybe instead of a question we could just have a preamble that says "this survey assumes a basic level of knowledge of lwdita - you can find out more here, before taking the survey, if interested -. if you are already familiar with lw dita, click here to take the survey" - the question on knowledge of specialization didn't seem to trigger anything - I was still getting both specialization questions regardless of my answer - for the question on what authoring tool they use today - here's my ten cents:         - remove stone carving - it's a classic and will never go away, but not used by our target audience         - remove pencil and paper- that was a fad, we've all moved on         - add PPT         - add Excel         - add inDesign         - add "other" field Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         Michael Priestley/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA Cc:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         07/13/2016 02:37 PM Subject:         Re: [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Dear all, Here’s a new version of the LwDITA survey that incorporates Michael’s comments: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ I still have to create some of the background texts, but I would love some feedback before I continue. Thanks a lot! Carlos ---  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 On Jul 6, 2016, at 4:19 PM, Michael Priestley < mpriestl@ca.ibm.com > wrote: My first thoughts - and thanks so much for pulling this together! How about this as a logic flow - trying to keep it mostly one stream, with skippable sections, rather than completely different branches.  Assumptions: I think we're going after an audience that is already somewhat aware of LW DITA, and considering using it - those are the ones who can answer the questions we have. If we go after too broad an audience we'll just confuse them, and get unhelpful answers. 1. Are you familiar with Lightweight DITA?        yes - skip background        no - offer background (minimal, with links to more, and the suggestion that they should consider reviewing that material and then coming back) 2. Is your organization using DITA of any kind today?        yes - give list of roles for selection                for each role selected, give option of providing up to 3 example URLs, with a field for the submitter to describe the content type                eg: Type of content: ---- URL for example, if available: ----                (note: non-technical sme shouldn't give marketing as an example since that's an explicit role - how about accountant?)        no - go to next question 3. Where are you considering using LW DITA?        list of roles again, again for each role have option of providing 3 content types and example urls 4. For the content you are considering LW DITA for, what authoring tools do you use today?        (should include XML editors, web cms forms) 5. Are you a tools developer?        yes - what formats do you need to accept as input?                (markdown, json, html, word, etc.)                 and what formats do you need to provide as output?                (above plus pdf, epub, etc.)        no - go to next question 6. Are you familiar with DITA specialization?        yes - skip to next question        no - give background 7. Are you familiar with LW DITA specialization?        yes - skip to next question        no - give background 6. The following elements in LW DITA provide the basic building blocks of content - more specialized forms of them can be created by the user through specialization. Is there anything missing from the basic list?          note: pre is for preformatted text, not prereqs 7. If we removed the following specialization capabilities from LW DITA, would it prevent your adoption?        if yes:        (needs to be multiple select)        - nestable containers (the div element in full DITA)        - attribute specializations off of base (any attributes that aren't metadata/props based)        - specialization from existing specializations (any specialization that isn't directly derived from topic and its elements)        - you've already removed a feature I need (write in)        if no (choice):        - I'm not planning to specialize        - or everything is fine, don't need those features 8. Given what you currently know about LW DITA, which of these potential benefits are important to you?        (list) 9. Can we contact you with follow up?  One final thing - if we can add the ability to page back/forward in the survey, would make it easier to revisit earlier answers (and to review it :-) Thanks again Carlos, Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Enterprise Content Technology Strategist mpriestl@ca.ibm.com From:         Carlos Evia < cevia@vt.edu > To:         dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org Date:         06/30/2016 02:40 PM Subject:         [dita-lightweight-dita] First draft of survey Sent by:         < dita-lightweight-dita@lists.oasis-open.org > Ok dear LwDITA/FINCH/MAGMA2/LITA sub-comittee friends, Here’s a link to the first draft of our survey: https://virginiatech.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_8k8wxUJxNB3ZcEJ Following Jang’s recommendation, the survey has two branches based on the participant’s knowledge/awareness of DITA. There are gaps in language and terminology, of course, but that happens in first drafts. Please send comments and feedback. Best, Carlos ---  Carlos Evia, Ph.D. Director of Professional and Technical Writing Associate Professor of Technical Communication Department of English Center for Human-Computer Interaction Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 24061-0112 (540)200-8201 --  Rahel Anne Bailie, Content Strategy & Ecosystems / Content Management & Design Content strategies for business impact  Mobile: +44 (0) 7869 643 685 / skype: rahelab Co-producer:  Content Strategy Workshops Co-editor:  The Language of Content Strategy Co-author:  Content Strategy: Connecting the dots between business, brand, and benefits -- Rahel Anne Bailie, Content Strategy & Ecosystems / Content Management & Design Content strategies for business impact  Mobile: +44 (0) 7869 643 685 / skype: rahelab Co-producer:  Content Strategy Workshops Co-editor: The Language of Content Strategy Co-author:  Content Strategy: Connecting the dots between business, brand, and benefits