Re: [docbook] Re: XML Editors

[Jeff Biss <jeff@marco-inc.com>]

Janning,

See my thoughts (for what they're worth) below:

Janning Vygen wrote:
> 200305010910.h419Aft15530@janning.planwerk6.local">
> Am Mittwoch, 30. April 2003 17:56 schrieb Dave Pawson:
> > At 08:54 30/04/2003 +0200, Steinar Bang wrote:
> > > I use GNU Emacs/psgml, which works great for me, with DTD-aware
> > > element insertion and attribute editing, XML tree navigation and
> > > editing, folding, and validation.  But I wouldn't dream of even
> > > _proposing_ it to someone who today uses MSWord.
> > >       
> > Sigh. I tried it.
> > Now I'd follow that advice.
> > I got some really funny looks  when I showed them emacs+psgml.
> >       
>
> Does any XML editor discussion  just show us, how difficult it is to 
> let an end user edit XML? Doesn't the end user always have to know 
> some markup to understand what his editor does?
>       
The writer must know which elements are to be used for their document. I
use FrameMaker most of the time for normal tech writing and must know the
structure of my documents in order to properly use the template's tags. I
have worked with many writers who never, ever, understood documentation specifications
that explicitly dictated structure and therefore proper tagging. their work
was always a mess. the difference is that FrameMaker would produce a document
whereas an XML editor will let you know when you tagged something wrong.
> 200305010910.h419Aft15530@janning.planwerk6.local">
>
>
> I am using XML a lot and i am editing in emacs and its fine. And some 
> customers of mine are editing their XML stuff in raw text editors 
> too. after teaching XML in half a day they managed it.
>         
There will always be a learning curve. People need to learn proper tagging
to ensure proper document structure regardless of the editor or whether they
are using XML.
> 200305010910.h419Aft15530@janning.planwerk6.local">
>
>
> every wysiwig editor i know has problems. It is not end user 
> compatible OR isnt flexible enough.
>           
Th only WYSIWYG XML editor I've used is XMLMind and it is very easy to use.
> 200305010910.h419Aft15530@janning.planwerk6.local">
>
>  
> But on the other hand: XMLEditors are always compared with Word. But 
> how many users can really use word? They can set a font, a font size, 
> bold, centering and thats it. Most people use word like an enhanced 
> text editor.
>             
Word is best for very simple documents. My clients try to use Word  when
FrameMaker or Ventura Publisher are the correct tools.
> 200305010910.h419Aft15530@janning.planwerk6.local">
>
>
> So i think to edit XML by an end user you need a reduced XML Editor.
>               
I hate to keep harping about it but XMLWriter is a fine tool and well worth
the approximately $50 it costs. It is a text based editor but makes it obvious
when you are not using a DTD's elements properly.
> 200305010910.h419Aft15530@janning.planwerk6.local">
>
>
> For docbook it would be fine to have an editor just doing the simple 
> stuff and maybe have a text mode in behind for advanced users.
>                 
There really isn't "simple" when it comes to using the DocBook DTD. One must
use the elements properly from the start otherwise one will spend a large
amount of time locating improperly used element tags.
> 200305010910.h419Aft15530@janning.planwerk6.local">
>
>
> 90% of all editing from the user perspective is
>  - paragraphs
>  - bold (means emphasis of course)
>  - linking
>  - add a graphic
>  - add a list
>  - tables
>                   
You could alter the DocBook as directed in the DocBook reference to reduce
the number of elements and produce your own DTD that is based on the DocBook.
> 200305010910.h419Aft15530@janning.planwerk6.local">
>
>
> i would like to have an editor just doing this in a word-like way 
> (with nice buttons and stuff like this) Most users don't really need 
> more.
>                     
Many users may not require XML at all too. You must help them determine which
documentation actuall requires XML and which can be left as an ASCII or Word
file. I have found that most users will produce incorrectly structured documents
regardless of the tool they use. The production crew then has the wonderful
job of fixing all the writers' errors, whether XML, FrameMaker, Ventura Publisher,
Word, or any other product.
                    
Jeff Biss
> 200305010910.h419Aft15530@janning.planwerk6.local">
>
>
> kind regards,
> janning
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>
>
>
>