← Prev in month
← Prev in thread
Next in thread →
Next in month →
Re: Reviewer (Doherty) Feedback on DITA 1.3 Proposals #13086, #13096, and #13098
Hi Stan, Thank you for your thorough review and comments. One question: Technical requirements / Processing impact > Comment: I am not sure what to make of the statement "None. Processing should fall back to that defined for topic/note." Would there be a "troubleshooting" icon or label preceding this element when processed? If so, why not simply add <note type="trouble"/> in this location? Since we cannot mandate a new icon, I believe this is the only position we can take with regard to processing. In the topic I'm writing about the three troubleshooting options, I do recommend the use of a Trouble icon. JoAnn JoAnn T. Hackos, PhD President Comtech Services Inc. 710 Kipling Street, Suite 400 Denver, CO 80215 303-232-7586 From: Stan Doherty <> Reply-To: Stan Doherty <> Date: Tuesday, March 5, 2013 3:01 AM To: DITA TC <>, Park Seth-R01164 <> Cc: "" <>, Kristen James Eberlein <>, JoAnn Hackos <>, "" <>, Park Seth-R01164 <> Subject: Reviewer (Doherty) Feedback on DITA 1.3 Proposals #13086, #13096, and #13098 Hi all -- Nice work! I like these proposed features very much. The following comments represent friendly technical and editorial feedback relative to the https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita-techcomm/download.php/48126/stage3_04feb13.zip content. Stan Doherty DITA TC Verivue/Akamai TOPIC: Stage 3 proposal: Feature 13086 ================================================================ - Short description: > Line edit: FROM: "Proposal to add a new element to support a troubleshooting statement after the <stepresult> element in a task topic." TO: "Proposal to add a new element to support a troubleshooting statement after the <stepresult> element in a <step> element in a task topic." - Clarification: Perhaps note somewhere that <steptroubleshooting> cannot be inserted within other "step" sub-elements such as <substeps> or <stepsxmp>. - Clarification: Perhaps note somewhere that <steptroubleshooting> currently ends a <step> element. I do not believe that a writer can insert another element AFTER <steptroubleshooting> within the <step>. - Approved technical requirements > Line edit: FROM: "Add troubleshooting element to a step: There is often a need to include a troubleshooting statement in a task step, following the <stepresult>. . . ." TO: "Add troubleshooting element to a step: There is often a need to include a troubleshooting statement in a task step, following the <stepresult> element. . . ." - Use cases > Line edit: FROM: "There is often a need to include a troubleshooting statement in a task step, following the <stepresult>." TO: "There is often a need to include a troubleshooting statement in a task step, following the <stepresult> element." - Modified DTDs > Line edit: FROM: "The only DTD file affected is dtd.mod under techincialContent/dtd." TO: "The only DTD file affected is dtd.mod under technicalContent/dtd." - Technical requirements / Processing impact > Comment: I am not sure what to make of the statement "None. Processing should fall back to that defined for topic/note." Would there be a "troubleshooting" icon or label preceding this element when processed? If so, why not simply add <note type="trouble"/> in this location? TOPIC: Stage 3 proposal: Feature 13096 ================================================================ - Short description: > Line edit: FROM: "Proposal to add a new element to support a troubleshooting section between the <result> and <example> elements in a task topic" TO: "Proposal to add a new element to support a troubleshooting section between the <result> element and either the <example> or the <postreq> element in a task topic" - Approved technical requirements > Line edit: FROM: "Add troubleshooting section with a task: There is often a need to include a troubleshooting section in a task, between the <result> and <postreq>." TO: "Add a troubleshooting section within a task: There is often a need to include a troubleshooting section in a task, specifically between the <result> element and either the <example> or the <postreq> element in a task topic." > Line edit: FROM: "It is expected the reader would need this problem-solving information before reading the <postreq> section, since their is no sense in moving forward if the expected result was not achieved." TO: "It is expected the reader would need this problem-solving information before reading the <postreq> section, since there would be no sense in moving forward if the expected result were not achieved." - Use cases > Line edit: FROM: "It is expected the reader would need this problem-solving information after reading the <result> section, since their is no sense in moving forward if the expected result was not achieved." TO: "It is expected that the reader would need this problem-solving information after reading the <result> section, since there would be no sense in moving forward if the expected result were not achieved." - Modified DTDs > Line edit: FROM: "A new element named <tasktroubleshooting> will follow <result> and precede <example> as an optional element. The only DTD file affected is dtd.mod under techincialContent/dtd." TO: "A new element named <tasktroubleshooting> will follow the <result> element and precede either the <example> or the <stepreq> element as an optional element. The only DTD file affected is dtd.mod under technicalContent/dtd." TOPIC: tasktroubleshooting =========================================================================== - Example: > Additional example information/context <steps> . . . </steps> <result>The <uicontrol>User Type</uicontrol> menu updates to display the new types you added.</result> <tasktroubleshooting>If the User Type menu does not display the additions, manually refresh the page.</tasktroubleshooting> <example>For example, you could also do xyz.</example> <postreq>Once completed, you need to consider abc.</postreq> TOPIC: Stage 3 proposal: Feature 13098 ============================================================================ - Editorial: Not a bad idea to start implementing the convention for specifiying <element-names> and @attribute-names . - This is the enhancement that I could use throughout my existing topics. On March 4, 2013 at 12:28 PM Park Seth-R01164 <> wrote: Dear TC, Today the TechComm SC gave final approval for three proposal to reviewed by the TC (pursuant to Stage three requirements): · 13096 · 13086 · 13098 All materials are available in a single zip archive: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/dita-techcomm/download.php/48126/stage3_04feb13.zip. The Trello cards have been updated. We have received 4 TC volunteers to review the proposals: Eliot Kimber, Stan Doherty, Kris Eberlein, and Thilo Bucholtz I would like to recognize the outstanding commitment of Bob Thomas throughout the process of articulating these proposals and the supporting materials. Thanks also to the entire SC for their reviews and constructive criticism. Thanks in advance to our TC reviewers! -seth park Stan Doherty Director, Technical Publications Verivue Inc.
← Prev in month
← Prev in thread
Next in thread →
Next in month →