[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: 'Gavin Thomas Nicol' <gtn@r...>, 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 10:40:52 -0600

converting longs to varchar
So, to repurpose, reuse, reapply?  We've always been 
able to do attachments, that is, either embed a reference 
to a document or the document itself into the database
using say, varchar longs. 
In the case of XML (using say MEMO fields), the costs 
weren't that high to embed the document, although 
embeddding say a scanned image makes one become very 
aware of DPI.  Ever see a database where 80% of the 
storage is scanned images that are used 20% of the time?

But none of these make it much easier to work with 
the document content as you point out.  What will 
make users happier is easier reuse?  However, if this 
is at the cost of making it harder to publish the 
original document (say, the RFP), that robs Peter 
to pay Paul.  So the publisher isn't happy.

That brings me back to the notion of fused views. 
The requirements for this don't generally exist 
outside the enterprise user base.  In other words, 
someone firing off a letter to the editor of the 
local newspaper doesn't need XML.  The news editor 
might like it though for streamlining his production, 
so it isn't unthinkable.  But again, when a project 
manager has to create a project plan, or an implementation 
manager has to create FAT tests, being able to directly 
access and compare both the proposal and the contract 
texts side by side at a citable paragraph level is 
very productive.   That is a fused view.  One can 
do that without XML by frontloading relational databases, 
but it is clunky, tedious, very time consuming, and 
leaves one with a record of authority problem.

The original document should be a data source in its 
original format.  Now XML is helping.

len


From: Gavin Thomas Nicol [mailto:gtn@r...]

Data capture is one small part. Having Office support XML etc. will simplify 
the effort of converting the data into what I *really* want (so to answer 
Len's question, XML is *not* important to Office itself, it just makes it a 
bit easier to work with the data). The real work happens after that... and 
banging stuff into a database may or may not help.

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.