I
would like to discuss the packaging at the TC level before responding to the
questions below. Hopefully we can fit this into our TC meeting this
week.
Regards,
Gershon
Hello Gershon
We just discussed on our meeting the proposed idea
"Then each specialization would have a separate spec, which
would consist of the lang spec and, where relevant, the arch
spec."
We
have some further questions to it.
The
DITA Machine Industry Subcommittee has developed for DITA 1.2 the hazard
statements domain and the task requirements domain. During the packaging
discussions in the TC, it was decided to move the hazard statement domain into
the base folder and the task requirements domain into the technical
content folder. Plus a machineryTask.dtd with a machineryTaskbodyConstraint.mod
file into the machineryIndustry folder.
Regarding a separate spec for each specialization, what
does that means to our work.
Do we
have to write a machineindustry related spec containing architectual and langref
information for the hazardstatements, taskrequirements and
machinerytask
or
do we
have to create 3 different specs?
or
is
there something else expected from us?
In our
point of view we just need a good guidance for users who would like to use these
domains, regardless if they are from the machinery industry or
not.
Looking forward hearing from you
Best
regards
Chris
Hi
Chris,
Thanks
for following up on this. I don't recall getting it before.
The
current thinking (which we inherited from the work Jeff Ogden did about a year
ago) is to have the arch spec limited to the base feature set. Then each
specialization would have a separate spec, which would consist of the lang spec
and, where relevant, the arch spec. In discussions with the DITA Adoption TC,
this approach was deemed acceptable, with the idea being that the arch spec
would precede the lang reference. Any best practices and other support info
needed to work with (and understand) the specialization would also be included
in this specialization-specific spec.
Would
your SC be OK to do it this way for the machinery
specialization?
Best
regards,
Gershon
Gershon
I have noticed that this mail I sent on 3rd of March
did not make it through to you.
Hope it works this time.
Best regards
Chris
Gershon
we have today
discussed the Architectual Specs ToC in the Machine Industry Subcommitte and
would like to make the following proposal.
To indicate specific
use of DITA in different industries we recommend an industry related chapter in
the architectual specs. Containing the following industries or areas (maybe
industry is a to specific limitation)
-
Software
- Machine
Industry
The Machine Industry
Subsection may contain:
a map for the machineindustry, containing 3 topic as a start (more topics e.g. diagnostics, troubleshooting, maintenance etc. will follow in DITA 1.3)
* An introduction topic
* hazardstatement topic
* task requirements topic