We never really decided definitively whether we were going to use DITA source for our docs. When I originally proposed the idea, I suggested it as a way to allow us to move beyond html-only docs and into PDF and possibly one-file-per-book html. I volunteered to convert the books to DITA so that we could see whether it would help us accomplish those goals.
I know that not all of the books have been contributed in DITA source yet. But I have made a lot of progress, and the last two books will be completed shortly. However, I think the usefulness of the DITA can be ascertained with the books currently available in DITA. While nothing is perfect yet, we have been able to create PDF and html from the DITA source and know that we will be able to overcome the formatting issues in time. In addition, we can display the output in Forrest, in an Eclipse infocenter, or however we want on our own using open source tools like saxon or FOP. These things would not be possible with our current html-sourced doc format. I also know that any other source idea will probably run into the same PDF issues we are having with DITA, so whether we were to go another avenue, or stay with DITA, we need to find solutions to these issues, and we will soon. I was hoping to finalize this so that we can set up plans to replace the html source with the DITA set and any jira issues in the future can be fixed in the DITA instead of the html. Can we vote on this by the end of next week or so? Any concerns?
