[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Of course, regardless of what framing language we might use about the TC
being the place for design, public discussion will take place anyway in
forums, at conferences, and in other contexts about how to improve DITA.
The statement for this page should encourage those collaborations to happen
so that well-formed proposals are what actually reach the TC via the
comment form. Your statement should make users aware, though, that
regardless of how well though out or prototyped an idea might be, it is
still the TC's role to evaluate the idea on overall value to all OASIS
Member companies, with as much focus on business as well as technical
merit.
Personally, I wish that the interface that OASIS provides to the public for
receiving comments was a little less stark than the current comment form.
Could we consider using this collaboration page as an alternate interface
for receiving feedback? Perhaps this is the chance to finally provide
context for comments--have one page for Draft comments, another for
specific published spec documents, another for new requirements gathering,
another for general RFEs not tied to a version, and so forth. Also, use
the design features of the Wiki to provide fields for other metadata about
the submitter--perhaps a business justification field for any RFEs, or a
log area for official TC responses to comments. At this point, I realize
that these features could be established on the TC's Wiki as well, but the
public Wiki is the starting place for the warm, trust zone that we want to
build for our potential commenters or contributors.
By the way, I've taken a first stab at using the TC's Wiki and can confirm
that it is easy to use and ready for TC business. I will bring this up at
next week's meeting so that we can direct some of our own collaborative
design work to that area.
Here is the info about it that I received from Mary McRae yesterday:
The URL is http://wiki.oasis-open.org/dita/ (trailing slash is required,
I believe). Anyone who is a *member* of the TC may
create/edit pages; observers and non-members have read-only access. XRI has
started using the wiki to keep track of issues/changes
(wiki.oasis-open.org/xri/). The more creative uses, the better!
I made a start at a list of potential TC categories--you can edit and
revise as you see fit.
Regards,
--
Don Day
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
IBM Lead DITA Architect
Email: dond@us.ibm.com
11501 Burnet Rd. MS9033E015, Austin TX 78758
Phone: +1 512-838-8550
T/L: 678-8550
"Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"
--T.S. Eliot
"Carol Geyer"
<carol.geyer@oasi
s-open.org> To
"'Jerry Silver'"
01/04/2006 10:17 <jerry.silver@blastradius.com>,
AM <dita-fa-edboard@lists.xml.org>
cc
Subject
RE: [dita-fa-edboard] Collaborating
on DITA Spec Proposals
I agree. I think Mary and I should take an action item to draft a statement
we can post that will encourage and define appropriate Focus Area
collaboration. Anyone else who'd like to participate in the wordsmithing,
let me know.
Carol
From: Jerry Silver [mailto:jerry.silver@blastradius.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 11:08 AM
To: Carol Geyer; dita-fa-edboard@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: [dita-fa-edboard] Collaborating on DITA Spec Proposals
I won't be able to make tomorrow's call.
I agree that actual work on the spec needs to be done through the TC. But
there is a lot of collaboration that takes place leading up to a proposal.
It seems that the FA is the right place to do that. Once an idea reaches
the formal proposal stage discussion and development of the idea can shift
to the TC.
Thanks,
Jerrya
From: Carol Geyer [mailto:carol.geyer@oasis-open.org]
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 7:47 AM
To: Jerry Silver; dita-fa-edboard@lists.xml.org
Subject: RE: [dita-fa-edboard] Collaborating on DITA Spec Proposals
We need to be careful on this, as collaborations on the spec itself should
be conducted through the OASIS DITA TC. Hopefully, we can use the Focus
Area to encourage new membership and greater participation in the work of
the TC. Perhaps we should publish a statement about what kinds of
collaboration are appropriate for the FA and what kinds should be advanced
within the TC so there's no confusion.
Let's discuss this with Mary McRae on tomorrow's call. (Mary's off sick
today.)
Carol
From: Jerry Silver [mailto:jerry.silver@blastradius.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 7:40 PM
To: dita-fa-edboard@lists.xml.org
Subject: [dita-fa-edboard] Collaborating on DITA Spec Proposals
I remember discussing the issue of how we will encourage people to
collaborate on ideas and proposals for enhancing the DITA spec, but I don't
remember how we resolved it. There's nothing obvious in the current
navigation.
Can someone refresh my memory? Is there any reason why "DITA Enhancements"
should not be a heading under DITA Community?
Thanks,
Jerry
JERRY SILVER
Director, Product Management
BLAST RADIUS Product Division
www.blastradius.com
direct +1 604 697 8708
mobile +1 604 786 3505
email jerry.silver@blastradius.com
|
