[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [dita-pharma] RE: More thinking about Pharmaceutical Documentsand DITA: Maps versus Templates
Hi Joel and Jim, From: James Averback <averbacj@ls-integration-partners.com> To: 'Brennan, Michael [CNTUS]' Cc: Laura.Zupko@gsk.com Sent: Mon Nov 08 12:53:42 2010 Subject: [dita-pharma] RE: More thinking about Pharmaceutical Documents and DITA: Maps versus Templates All, I agree with Joel’s specific
concepts outlined below as being essential in pharma documentation. Having said that, I don’t
believe the capability of having content which is optionally included, document
specific or of a repeatable nature depends upon the DITA standard or specifically
on the concept of a topic map. These capabilities are at least
equally dependent upon the toolset with which one generates each topic map. As long as a topic map can be
created for any single document, the question then becomes what does one have
to do in order to create the correct topic map for the document in question. I see this view as one that
clearly must distinguish the topic map from the more static concept of a
traditional template as we have used for authoring content in MS Word. As I see it, there is still a need
in DITA for libraries of commonly used topic map components (or sub-maps) which
can be dynamically combined to generate the right instance of a topic map as
needed. In this way, there is
consistency in the structure while allowing a dynamic assembly of the specific
structure needed for any given document. Having put forth this view that
topic maps are dynamically assembled, I would also say in practice pharma
documentation will “re-use” many topic maps (of course with updated
topic binding). A key assumption here, if we are
thinking about clinical studies, is that while there are many different designs
for clinical studies, good designs do tend to be re-used and while the specific
content may vary for each study (i.e., there will be no two studies that are
exactly alike) there will be a high degree of re-usable topic map components
(i.e., sub-maps). Thoughts? -- Jim From: Brennan, Michael
[CNTUS] [mailto:MBrenna3@its.jnj.com] Joel: Good questions. Adding to your questions –
I am not sure that I would call inclusion/exclusion criteria as
“repeating components” . It depends whether you view
inclusion/exclusion criteria as a section vs a collection of criteria.
Some criteria will be shared across protocol while others will be revised or
new criteria created. Other point that we need to
consider is whether a given element (topic) will be referenced by another
file. How critical is it to have “persistent meta-data”
that will help define “authoritative sources” of information. Michael From: Joel Finkle
[mailto:Joel.Finkle@imagesolutions.com] I've come across another topic that's worth thinking about
in terms of the DITA standard and extensions needed for Pharmaceutical Regulatory
documents: The DITA Map specification is pretty darn slim. The DITA Map is how topics are collected into documents, and
they are listed as sequential, tabular, etc. This is sufficient to describe the output document that has
been created from topics, but I don't think it's enough to be a template for a
lot of regulatory documents. Specifically, the DITA Map concept does not seem to include
concepts such as: ·
Optional components (e.g. a pediatric safety
statement in a protocol) ·
Selection from a choice (taking the protocol
again, a standard, versus pediatric versus geriatric template, all based on a
single set of topics) ·
Repeating components (e.g. adding another
objective, inclusion criteria, study event, etc.) In my mind, a system that is capable of storing templates
for creating regulatory documents, should be able to handle these concepts, and
create (from templates) the needed topics as you make your choices and add to
lists of items. This doesn't seem to be part of the DITA standard. I
don't have much experience with DITA tools, so it's possible that this has
already been implemented. I need to look at more of the commercial tools
and the Open Toolkit. Joel ----
The
information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it
is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any
review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action
in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the
intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact
the sender and delete the material from all computers. |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]