The question is more about adoption and job-listings. The article points out the fluctations and that makes sense. From that perspective though:
- Does it mean the tech is stagnant?
- Does it mean the tech is failing?
From an outsider perspective maybe, but from my research: DITA is thriving.
The problem is: The Curse Of Success
In the normie world when you “get it right” and it doesn’t need to change much then generally it is considered a success. For example the periodic table is somewhat controversial but overall it is a good system. Additionally recipes for classic food work because well, they don’t change much: they are classic. Are these horrible analogies? Maybe, but I think you get the point. For techies it is another story though.
For techies the measure technology of success typically quantified in either mass-recognition or job-postings. That is a fine way to measure it because it must be measured. However it is uninspiring: it doesn’t capture what the rest of the world would call success. Any more tech examples you ask? Certainly!
- Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) progeny suffer the fate of success. For example OpenBSD’s design-stability is often ignored beyond mentioning that it is the source of OpenSSH.
- When there aren’t code commits for a few months on Org2Blog questions arise of whether or not the project has died. Come on: really? There aren’t always new features to add or bugs to fix (or time and manpower to fix them.)
- Thousands of tiny-projects suffer the same hilarity Org2Blog faces: success and stability generally alarm people.
DITA on the other hand, surely there are flaws, but overall my research says things are looking good despite The Curse Of Success.