[Framers] structured content - not always called for

[Monique Semp]

> The broader point I was commenting on is whether DITA has become so prevalent that people who do not know about structured authoring are starting to believe that implementing structured authoring is the same thing as implementing DITA, since the two terms are often used interchangeably.

Ah, I see. And yes, we certainly need to be careful so that people don’t conflate “structured authoring” with “DITA”.
I purposely used the slash construct, “structured/DITA” precisely because I wanted to address both “structured authoring, regardless of the tool” and “DITA”. But I agree that, unfortunately, this construct makes them seem interchangeable. I’ll have to think how to reword the title. If I drop either one, I might lose people who are thinking about the one that I dropped (for example, dropping “DITA” and saying just, “structured authoring”), and who don’t realize that the presentation is applicable to them even though it uses the other term. Which could happen if they’ve conflated the terms.
So I’ll need to think how to re-title it, and am glad for this discussion that brought the issue to the forefront!
-Monique