Skip to content

Meeting minutes 2016 02 04

Roger Sheen edited this page Feb 5, 2016 · 4 revisions

DITA-OT Docs Call — February 04, 2016

Contents

Attendance

  • Juliane
  • Magda
  • Nick
  • Roger
  • Sebastien
  • Shane

New contributors

As of this call, we have 9 contributors.

Welcome aboard and many thanks to Shane Taylor, who submitted 3 pull requests since the last call.

OT project status updates (recent releases, upcoming plans)

  • DITA-OT 2.2.2 was released, with 2 main fixes:
    http://www.dita-ot.org/2.2/release-notes

    1. Shortdescs from bookmaps w/ BASIC chapter layout #2023
    2. Windows Ant bug #2172
  • DITA-OT 2.2.3 maintenance release planned with further 2.2 bugfixes

  • Development docs at http://www.dita-ot.org/dev/ have new features,
    serve as a prototype for new WebHelp output:

    1. Bootstrap Sass for additional styling options (see note styles, etc.)
    2. Dynamic ToC can be expanded & collapsed independent of current topic
    3. Topic finder: press t to filter the list of topic titles
    4. Keyboard shortcuts help: press ?

New issues & pull requests since last call

3 New Pull Requests

5 New Issues

Fixed issues & pull requests since last call

Backlog review

Currently 20 Open Issues, 30 Closed:
https://github.com/dita-ot/docs/issues

Shane's latest pull request 62 currently in review, minor issues to address, should be merged soon.

Issue prioritization (focus areas for next few weeks)

  • Add info on migrating to v2.x #29

    Shane is preparing input, not ready to merge yet. Proposes tracking this in a public feature branch rather than develop. Sebastien's team @ HERE is gathering migration best practices internally in their wiki, may be able to contribute portions of that as input soon.

  • Troubleshooting builds #56

Other topics (questions, suggestions, discussion)

Shane asks what markup to use in code examples to highlight inserted/deleted code? Currently using elements from the highlighting domain: <b> for insertions and <line-through> for deletions, as no more semantically appropriate alternatives seem to be available.

Shane wonders whether we want to highlight known DITA-OT issues in the docs?

Clearly there are some cases in which project owners may be reluctant to call attention to defects in software, but there are cases where the toolkit may behave differently than users expect, and it might be good to say:

This doesn't work the way you think it does, it works another way.

Roger suggests this content could be seen as related to troubleshooting information and included somewhere nearby.

Shane creates a new issue to track this task: https://github.com/dita-ot/docs/issues/63

Proposal from Shane for discussion:

Many of the issues are quite large in scope. Would more granular issues be easier to work with? I think they would encourage participation and make it easier to track progress. But then, I've grown to like working in Agile with frequent iterations, so maybe it's just me 😃