[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: Re: Are the publishing users happy? Why not?

• To: 'Jonathan Robie' <jonathan.robie@d...>, "'Simon St.Laurent'" <simonstl@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Re: Are the publishing users happy? Why not?
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 13:34:11 -0600

Then I ask you this question:  can XML namespaces 
be leveraged to help guide an author?  I say it can.

<nikon:lens> 

is better than 

<lens>

At the very least, I don't have to use OR 
groups to show the author what is expected.
BTW:  I need schemas in my world.  No D'oh.

There is a tension among several dimensions 
of constraints that the markup designer has 
to consider.  Maybe we can identify these 
and qualify them.  To start:

1.  What tools are available and what features 
do they support?  Without knowing this, everything 
else is moot.  It may be the case that no tools 
are selected yet and that is part of the XML 
expert's job.  So much the better.

2.  Does the end user do a part of the job or 
all of the job of preparing the final bound 
deliverable?

3.  Is the order of assembly important? By 
that, I mean the binding order of the document 
into some fixed form for publishing.

4.  Are some parts of the assembly/document 
more important than others and why?  Eg, 
a paragraph description of a part assembly 
vs the remove and replace procedure?  Are 
these verified/validated/edited independently? 
(That can be the case in say, an LSAR driven 
logistics environment)?

5.  Is the document composed of different 
XML vocabularies (eg, SVG, XHTML, etc.)?

6.  Does size matter?  Eg, size of the whole 
entity, size of the tags, size of the data 
content?  Is this a medium-dependency (say 
network messages) vs a tool dependency (say 
editors for attributes)?

7.  Should tag names be acronymized or 
self-documenting?  See 6 and 2.

I'm stopping there for the moment.  Others?

Assertion (unproven): complexity of content 
and complexity of markup are about the same if one 
drops HTML or other forms of presentation 
markup.   One can always resort to generic 
coding to eliminate complexity, but at that 
point, markup itself becomes moot except 
for cut and paste applications.  One can 
transform, but again, records of authority 
aren't transformed unless proven reversible.

len


From: Jonathan Robie [mailto:jonathan.robie@d...]

It certainly interests me, especially if it involves real examples with 
real schemas and usage scenarios and lots of pointy brackets.

I really like XML-Dev best when we're trying to work together to find 
solutions to real technical problems. (I like to reminisce about the SAX 
1.0 days ;-> )

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: Are the publishing users happy? Why not?
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: How to redesign W3C XML Schema (Was: Remembering the original XML vision)
• Next by Date: Re: Re: How to redesign W3C XML Schema (Was: Remembering the original XML vision)
• Previous by thread: RE: Re: Are the publishing users happy? Why not?
• Next by thread: Re: Re: Are the publishing users happy? Why not?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread