DITA Task model

To levelset - Andrzej, are you really
proposing this for DITA 1.2? We've spent two years getting to this stage
of development and documentation - do we want to hit the reset button?

I support the idea of a simple-DITA
proposal for 1.3. I have zero confidence in its readiness or appropriateness
for 1.2.

Michael Priestley, Senior Technical
Staff Member (STSM)

Lead IBM DITA Architect



http://dita.xml.org/blog/25

From:
"Bruce Nevin (bnevin)" <>

To:
"Andrzej Zydron" <>,
<>

Cc:
"Joann Hackos" <>,
"DITA TC" <>

Date:
09/24/2009 02:02 PM

Subject:
RE: [dita] DITA Task model

Andrej,

You refer to your June 2008 exchange with Michael at

http://tinyurl.com/ycz87lt,
where you summarized your proposal thus:

>... a definitive subset of DITA, let's call

>it for argument's sake EDEN (Electronic Documentumentation Essential

>Norm) .... EDEN would be a completely

>valid DITA form but would not allow the following constructs:

>

>1) Recursive elements - no recursion

>2) Block spanning elements - only inline elements allowed within block

>elements

>3) Conrefs - replaced by xrefs for linguistically complete phrases
or

>sentences

>4) Specialization past the basic Topic, Concept, Task and Reference
-

no

>specialization

I'll remind the BusDocs team of this for its relevance to the proposal

under review there.

                
/Bruce

>