Guiding Questions (temp)  Should the TC:  Allow each implementation to figure it out (status quo)?  Allow XML tool vendors to figure it out in their UI presentation?  Provide a file-based TC documented standard approach?  Subcommittee Comment  Early adopters need direction to avoid costly mistakes  Dependant on “critical mass” adoption  Potentially promotes use for technical documents  Supports DITA adoption efforts  Provides interoperability

Aggregated Authoring Author Requirements Certain business processes rely an authoring/edit/review presentation of multiple titled entities (‘sections’) as a single business document Content Strategy Requirements The business wants to implement DITA topics and maps to achieve process improvements Role of the Subcommittee The goal of this subcommittee is to define accepted practices to reconcile these requirements in DITA authoring tools

Presentation and Content Management The run-time creation, revision, or review of a “document” The storage of that content as: multiple individually stored topics and a related map

Storage side assumptions From a CMS perspective, DITA currently accommodates the creation and storage of a single document comprised of nested topics in two ways: Save an individual file that contains nested topics Save a DITA map file and its component topic files The problem from a implementation perspective: Support the requirement to: Create the content as a single document in an editor Save/access individual topic files from document Recreate the state of the single document for edit and iterate