Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Open Source XML Editor
 True. But remember that when you make the DTD/Schema drive the editor, you may be mixing the data structures and the document structures (sure you can use XSLT to get around some of this). Some like this kind of editing, but the structures make a lot of difference. DTDs that had to cover a family of documents produce bizarre complex editing paths. So the analysis is very important both in the lifecycle path of the information and the workflow of the production staff. Problems like this lead to a lot of the early thinking about enterprise wide markup systems. Michael's examples reflect programming documentation. Of the types of technical information I've worked with, it is the easiest. The harder bits tended to be the hardware systems with the extensively indexed and cross-referenced drawings combined with repair and assembly. Software and the the software authors are a piece of cake by comparison. What Alshuler missed as I recall was that many tech writers were stuck like tractors in a muddy bog by the writing standards they had been using. It was part of the problem of the 38784/28001 roadblocks put up to doing interactive technical manuals. They did not want to code the tags to begin with, then when they began, they immediately replicated all of the problems for which they were the owners of the solutions. So even if the markup was easy, the mindset was wrong. Today, the almost shocking thing is that so many of them won't give up WinHelp or WinHelp tools. A LOT of software companies are still grinding out hypertext that is mundane and production-intensive because the tech writer leads and their managers refuse to use database-driven systems. So customers request paper copies for various good reasons and these companies refuse to give them source that would enable this and claim that everyone knows that digital is the only way to go. They defend that ferociously as a cost savings for the customer all the while really defending their own arcane methods. Fact is, it's a con. A decent hypertext format with transforms lets any device get the information as needed in the format needed and that includes the old devices... like paper. Own the solution? Defend the problem. Len Bullard Intergraph Public Safety clbullar@i... http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Marcus Carr [mailto:mrc@a...] Michael Smith wrote: > Even with the best editing app in the world, I think document authors > find structured authoring simple only when the content they need to > mark up is simple -- that is, it has a simple structure and lacks a > variety of discrete classes of "objects" that need to be marked up. > > Marking up technical documentation, for example, is inherently > difficult because it has a relatively complex structure and variety of > discrete kinds of objects -- variables, filenames, code examples, and > so on -- that authors must recognize and mark up appropriately. I agree, and would even go further. Liora Alshuler wrote a great article about ten years ago about how writers aren't necessarily at all intimidated by markup. After all, they have a lot of understanding about what they're doing - they probably wouldn't be writing about the topic if they didn't. The moral was to spend time on the analysis, and design a succinct and appropriate structure in concert with the writing team. Then even "complex" documents need not be difficult to author to. A good "guided syntax editor" is an invaluable tool for a system like this. 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
