Re: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming - Don Day (LbW) - org.oasis-open.lists.dita

13 messages in org.oasis-open.lists.ditaRe: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming

From	Sent On	Attachments
Bruce Nevin (bnevin)	Oct 13, 2010 7:33 am
Doug Morrison	Oct 13, 2010 8:07 am
Michael Boses	Oct 13, 2010 8:32 am
Su-Laine Yeo	Oct 19, 2010 2:37 pm
Michael Priestley	Oct 20, 2010 7:00 am
Bruce Nevin (bnevin)	Oct 20, 2010 9:22 am
Jang F.M. Graat	Oct 20, 2010 11:40 am
Don Day (LbW)	Oct 20, 2010 11:55 am
Su-Laine Yeo	Oct 20, 2010 11:57 am
Bruce Nevin (bnevin)	Oct 20, 2010 12:01 pm
Michael Boses	Oct 20, 2010 12:06 pm
Jang F.M. Graat	Oct 20, 2010 8:04 pm
Don Day (LbW)	Oct 20, 2010 9:46 pm

Subject:	Re: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming
From:	Don Day (LbW) (don...@learningbywrote.com)
Date:	Oct 20, 2010 9:46:22 pm
List:	org.oasis-open.lists.dita

I agree completely with you. Strike my suggestion, and count me as fully behind the original wording.

On 10/20/2010 10:04 PM, Jang F.M. Graat wrote:

Hello Don,

Adding the word "necessarily" actually makes people feel it IS some sort of guidance. Stating something is not a reliable guide does not state is is NOT the direction DITA will be moving in, nor does it state that it IS. It simply states that people should not build their future on the info in the document, and that seems to be exactly what we're trying to express in that particular disclaimer. So I would not add "necessarily".

On 20 okt 2010, at 20:56, Don Day (LbW) wrote:

Jang, you have eloquently expressed the unease I felt about the course of the discussion. I like your minimalist approach--it says what it needs to say while leaving the responsibility for how the information is used up to the user without discouraging their interest in the potential of the exploratory work. I endorse this approach. I might suggest only the consideration of adding a word that adds a bit of length to the leash: "It is not *necessarily* a reliable guide..."

On 10/20/2010 1:40 PM, Jang F.M. Graat wrote:

Hello all,

After listening / reading quietly for over a year, here's my first 2 cents, about the disclaimer discussion:

Being a minimalist at heart, I would use fewer words and rephrase the disclaimer as follows:

"This document reflects exploratory work. It is not a reliable guide on the future direction of DITA. It should not be taken as guidance for using DITA or for developing DITA tools."

The fact that it is work by a subcommittee is irrelevant, as exploratory papers may also be produced by the TC as a whole, right ? So leaving out the reference to the subcommittee makes the statement useful for any exploratory document that might emerge out of the DITA TC community. Also, the fact that it is not endorsed or approved by the TC is irrelevant, as that is not the nature of exploratory documents. They are meant to be input for discussions, not proposals to be approved. Each document will have some reference to the authorship, which may be an individual TC or SC member or an SC or even the TC as a whole. It can still be exploratory, and should not be taken as definitive. That is all we're trying to state. So leave out all the redundant and irrelevant information.

On 20 okt 2010, at 18:23, Bruce Nevin (bnevin) wrote:

Re the added phrase:

and is not endorsed by the DITA Technical Committee as a whole

We don't want it to sound like the TC disapproves of this work (or even of SC work in general). How about something like "has not yet been taken up as work of the Technical Committee as a whole"? That might look like this:

"Because this document reflects exploratory work by a subcommittee of the DITA Technical Committee, which has not yet been taken up as work of the Technical Committee as a whole, it is not a reliable guide as to the future direction of DITA, and should not be taken as guidance for using DITA or for developing DITA tools."

________________________________

From: Michael Priestley [mailto:mpri...@ca.ibm.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 10:01 AM To: Su-Laine Yeo Cc: di...@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming

Sounds good to me. I'll add a quick thought for Michael B's question:

- refrain from presenting subcommittee work as an official OASIS TC position in a public forum (webinar, conference, white paper, etc)

I still need clarification on the second issue, as my understanding may allow more exposure of the subcommittee work than the TC would

like.

I think the key phrase there is "as an official TC position". If it's presented as exploratory work to solicit feedback, I personally don't see any problem with that. But if it's presented as established strategy or direction, that would be dangerously misleading.

Michael Priestley, Senior Technical Staff Member (STSM) Lead IBM DITA Architect mpri...@ca.ibm.com http://dita.xml.org/blog/25 <http://dita.xml.org/blog/25>

From: "Su-Laine Yeo" <su-l...@justsystems.com> To: <di...@lists.oasis-open.org> Date: 10/19/2010 05:46 PM Subject: RE: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming

________________________________

Hi everyone,

Longer-term, I think we should move in the direction of having variety of standardized messages to display on documents to indicate their level of official-ness and final-ness, and put a message on every single document and web page that we make visible to the public. I'm more concerned about the public finding the TC's outdated versions of technical proposals for DITA features than about the public reading SC documents. Also, a lot of publicly-available content on OASIS's websites is simply the ideas of one or more individual TC members and isn't even approved by a subcommittee, and that stuff needs disclaimers most of all. But all that will require more mulling-over for a later time. End of rant for now ;)

For our immediate needs, I think the gist of Bruce's suggestion is good, and suggest the following rewordings for clarity:

"This document reflects exploratory work by a subcommittee of the DITA Technical Committee and is not endorsed by the DITA Technical Committee as a whole. It is not a reliable guide as to the future direction of DITA, and should not be taken as guidance for using DITA or for developing DITA tools."

W.r.t. Michael's request for guidance on the second issue he described, I don't have any thoughts at this time, although I appreciate the question.

Cheers, Su-Laine

Su-Laine Yeo Solutions Consultant JustSystems Canada, Inc. Office: 778-327-6356 sy...@justsystems.com

XMetaL Community Forums: http://forums.xmetal.com <http://forums.xmetal.com/>

-----Original Message----- From: Michael Boses [mailto:mbo...@QUARK.com <mailto:mbo...@QUARK.com> ] Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 8:33 AM To: Doug Morrison; di...@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming

Doug, I see the point that many entities outside of the DITA TC provide guidance. I think the issue here is clarification that subcommittees do not issue guidance. Official OASIS Guidance, when it originates in a subcommittee, is the result of subcommittee deliverables being vetted and incorporated into guidance by the parent committee.

At least this is how I understand it as someone trying to follow the rules as a subcommittee co-chair. There are two things we have been asked to do:

- place a caveat on our posts indicating their status as not approved for implementation (It looks like Bruce's wording achieves that).

- refrain from presenting subcommittee work as an official OASIS TC position in a public forum (webinar, conference, white paper, etc)

I still need clarification on the second issue, as my understanding may allow more exposure of the subcommittee work than the TC would like. Presenting some of the ideas of our subcommittee is the best way to vet them with the actual stakeholders in external organizations. We certainly can pass on that opportunity, but I need to make sure that is the TC's intention. It may be that any public presentations we make will need to include a disclaimer similar to the one we will place on posts.

Perhaps, Don, Michael, or others on the TC can clarify if and how we handle informing the public on progress and obtaining feedback.

Regards,

Michael Boses

-----Original Message----- From: Doug Morrison [mailto:dmor...@dita4all.com <mailto:dmor...@dita4all.com> ] Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 11:07 AM To: di...@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [dita] rubric for SC brainstorming

I think the final sentence "Such guidance is exclusively in the

purview of the DITA Technical Committee" should be dropped - because it is not true as it stands, and not necessary.

Regards,

Doug Morrison Information Architect http://dita4all.com <http://dita4all.com/>

On 13/10/2010 15:33, Bruce Nevin (bnevin) wrote:

In yesterday's call, we talked about subcommittees needing

some kind of

cover for creative discussion and brainstorming so that

outside readers

of the discussion won't take it as guidance from the TC. The relevant bit from the minutes (as amended to include Seth's name):

Seth Park: For DITA and composite environments, we came up with a feature request that was technically not implementable. Is there a `code word' under which to talk in papers and not shut down creativity. MB: A standard disclaimer would be wonderful. Don, MP: Let's pursue that on the alias.

I imagine two aspects of a disclaimer, its content and its location.

For example, on the title page or in a footnote on the title or in a note paragraph placed prominently on the first page (to be decided), a subcommittee document might say something like:

This paper reflects exploratory work by a subcommittee of the DITA Technical Committee. It is not a reliable guide as to the future direction of DITA, and should not be taken as guidance for implementing or using DITA. Such guidance is exclusively in the purview of the DITA Technical Committee.

Let the discussion begin!

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php <https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php>

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php <https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php>

	Start a set with this search
	Include this search in one of my sets
	Exclude this search from one of my sets