Re: RE: Word processors and semantic content
You guys should use Xopus over the web :) We have very non technical users creating XML Schema valid content basically in the same way they work with a regular word processor. best, -Rob p.s. Hey Laurens, do I get a discount if they buy? :) On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 12:41 -0500, Cox, Bruce wrote: > I'd have to agree. The USPTO tried some years ago to persuade > applicants to submit patent applications in XML with very little > success. Those few corporate customers who adopted the tools we gave > them (MS Word with template conversion to XML) produced documents that > were not reliably structured. While the software itself was > problematic, the bigger issue was that the person creating the document > did not use the styles (structures) appropriately (abstract tagged as > the last claim, for example). You could argue that it's only a matter > of training the users in the conceptual model of the patent application > contained in the structure of the underlying schema, and then they'd be > able to correctly populate that structure, but I don't think so. These > were folks who knew all about the structure of a patent application > (professional clerks in very large IP law firms), but had no economic > motivation to be careful with the markup. > > As I see it, the conceptual (abstract logical) model of a document (of > any kind) extant in any given culture is vague, but very powerful. > Anyone who uses typewriter/word processor tools has a tacit model that > is based on a "blank page" paradigm that bestows nearly unlimited > freedom of layout. Think of the difference of appearance between a > formal wedding invitation and a legal brief presented to a court, and > you'll see that a great deal of highly significant information is > conveyed through the layout. In both cases, the tacit model is > elaborated into more-or-less detailed models more-or-less explicitly > specified in either manuals of etiquette or through long exposure while > studying law. In the case of patent applications, the Manual of Patent > Examining Procedure provides a great deal of detail about the content of > an application but usually does not compel specific format or layout > (all 100+ forms are optional). The manner in which the rules are > expressed is such that a great deal of flexibility is retained by the > applicant while ensuring that the Office gets what it needs to examine > the application in accord with the law. Creating a successful patent > application is the art of conforming to the rules of the MPEP, correctly > using language to which the courts have assigned specific > interpretations, disclosing the invention to one of ordinary skill in > the art while escaping the attention of competitors, and still > compelling the examiner to allow the application. How do you create an > authoring tool that enables that process without sacrificing sufficient, > correct structure? > > The cost of adding explicit structure (markup) to a document is offset > by the savings achieved with the automatic processing that the markup > enables. I used to think that, as the WWII-induced mania for > industrializing all aspects of human discourse continues into the 21st > century, it would happen that the tacit document model and the > blank-page paradigm would evolve into something friendlier to explicit > structure, largely because of the introduction of programming skills at > earlier and earlier stages of formal schooling. I'm not so sure any > more, especially since most of the markup people encounter today is HTML > and other types of primordial ooze conveyed through the WWW. Things > will be different, but will they be better? > > Until the tacit model (and human behavior along with it) changes, I > suspect that the outcome of Microsoft vs. ODF is irrelevant. At > present, both of them appear to perpetuate rather than change the tacit > model. Perhaps Google has the best opportunity to do otherwise, but > I've seen nothing yet to suggest that they will. > > Bruce B Cox > US Patent & Trademark Office > Manager, Standards Development Division > > The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and > do not represent the official views of the US Patent & Trademark Office. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Laurens van den Oever [mailto:laurens@x...] > Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 7:50 AM > To: xml-dev@l... > Subject: Word processors and semantic content > > Dear List, > > I enjoyed reading Elliotte's Future of XML article . He made some > interesting comments and sharp observations. > > But I disagree with one of the key statements in the article. > I'd like to share my thoughts with the list and learn what you think. > > At one point Elliotte says: > > "Traditionally, you see two hard problems in training non-techies to > write for the Web: teaching them semantic markup and showing them how to > use FTP." > > And: > > "XML-enabled word processors like OpenOffice and Microsoft Word solve > the first problem." > > I don't think the first problem is solved. Word processors aren't going > to magically create semantic markup now that they can dump their > internal models to XML files. > > To me the semantic authoring problem is the problem of having non > technical people creating semantic (and structured) content that meets > the requirements set by the use of that content. > > If you're creating a plain weblog, a word processor may offer sufficient > semantics. But if you have requirements that impose a structure that is > more complex than HTML with custom tags, for instance nested sections, > or a required element order, the flexibility (which is perceived as > usability) of a word processor does more harm than good IMHO. > > What are your thoughts on this? > > Disclaimer: As an XML editor vendor, I'm biased, especially since our > core business is structured editing for non-techies. > >  http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/x-xml2008prevw.html > > Laurens van den Oever > CEO > Xopus Company > > laurens at xopus.com > http://xopus.com > > +31 70 4452345 > Waldorpstraat 17G > 2521 CA Den Haag > The Netherlands > > KvK 27308787 > > > _______________________________________________________________________ > > XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS > to support XML implementation and development. To minimize > spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting. > > [Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/ > Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@l... > subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@l... > List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/ > List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
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