|
1.
Yes, just so. We have wider and wider scopes of application for the markup
language.
Syntax
diagrams;
language that appears in programs;
language, controls, and other screen
phenomena that appear in user interfaces;
and
conceptual language that governs how our audiences think about the work that
they perform.
2. We have many ways of marking up identifiers and other
expressions.
There are significant differences in purpose among them,
and in some places, those purposes
interact. So we need to discuss those
different purposes explicitly
and define and
organize the markup in a way
that reflects those different purposes.
If we do not explicitly design around the
purposes, we instead reason about the effect that we can achieve with each
element.
The clashes among various combinations of
effects are leading to the clashes about how to use the
markup,
and what to allow and
disallow.
3. As a result of the examination done in item
2, we would have specific elements,
as we do now, plus a design that explains why
those elements cover our needs,
and that systematizes any future structural
specializations and any proposals for similar new
elements.
Best wishes,
Bruce
Hi
Bruce--
Okay, I think I understand a little better now.
What you
are basically asking for is that the scope of the <kwd> element be
expanded beyond <syntaxdiagram> elements, so that it can be used to
trigger different formatting of programming keywords on output - and so that
writers aren't tempted to use <keyword> just to mark something as a
programming keyword.
Or am I still missing
something?
--Dana
Esrig, Bruce (Bruce) wrote:
Hi Dana,
The distinctions were based on a use case argument that I might not have made explicit.
Content-related functions to be supported:
- make an identifier stand out (userinput)
- indicate that an identifier has an associated definition (term)
- indicate that an identifier has a pre-determined, fixed interpretation (wintitle)
Description-related functions to be supported:
- provide good search targets that permit a topic to be found (keyword)
- provide good index entries that permit a topic to be found (indexterm)
Applications:
- general descriptive text about products, services, and processes
- documentation of concept-rich information such as software
In the example, in the concept "Snow shovel", the descriptive keyword "tool"
does not appear in the content but would make a good search target.
Reversing the situation: the content term "scoop" does appear
in the content but would not make a good search target.
Even in documenting a programming language or a software application,
there is a need for markup for content keywords such as "then" or "OK"
which are usually not the target of a search or an index lookup.
If these get swept up and made into descriptive keywords
by an automatic process, then the value of the results is reduced.
Best wishes,
Bruce
-----Original Message-----
From: Dana Spradley [mailto:dana.spradley@oracle.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 3:41 PM
To: JoAnn Hackos
Cc: Esrig, Bruce (Bruce); Don Day; Paul Prescod;
dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [dita] Keywords in DITA (example)
According to the spec, JoAnn - which I also am fairly new to - a <term>
will link to its definition in the glossary in some future DITA
development. (I just looked it up myself)
Similarly, in line with Don's comments I don't see why inline <keyword>
elements shouldn't be mined to populate the web page metadata on output,
in some future development of the DITA toolset - if desired. Not
everyone wants to make a second labor of putting them in the <keywords>
element.
I think the confusion that has sparked this discussion comes from
insisting too narrowly on the difference between a keyword in the
technical programming sense ("keyword-of-content") and a keyword in the
metadata sense ("keyword-of-description"). While a difference certainly
exists - it evaporates fairly quickly when we're talking about
*documenting* a programming language.
For then, the keywords of the language are the keywords of your
descriptions and the keywords you want in your metadata, right? So if
someone is searching for information on how to use this keyword in a
programming sense, they'll find the pages that describe it.
The definition of <keyword> in the spec, though, should be tuned up a
bit, to avoid (or deal with) this potential confusion.
--Dana
JoAnn Hackos wrote:
I don' t understand the <term> element. Can that now be used? Is
there processing avialable?
JoAnn
JoAnn T. Hackos, PhD
President
Comtech Services, Inc.
710 Kipling Street, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80215
303-232-7586
joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com
http://www.comtech-serv.com <http://www.comtech-serv.com/>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Esrig, Bruce (Bruce) [mailto:esrig@lucent.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 12:40 PM
To: JoAnn Hackos; Don Day; Paul Prescod
Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [dita] Keywords in DITA (example)
Yes, a good example would help ... anyone want to buy a snow shovel
(see example) ?
Here goes,
Bruce
=============
First the hierarchy.
Keyword archetype.
- keyword-as-description
o existing keyword element, in the sense defined by HTML/Docbook
o existing indexterm element
- keyword-as-content
o wintitle
o widgettype
o widgetname
Now some markup.
<task id="snowShovelInventory-task" xml:lang="en-us">
<title>Checking the inventory of snow shovels</title>
<taskbody>
<context><p>Check whether snow shovels are available before
running out to buy one.</p></context>
<steps>
<step><cmd>Access the <wintitle>Inventory
Window</wintitle>.</cmd></step>
<step><cmd>Enter <userinput>snow shovel</userinput> in the
<widgetname>Item</widgetname> field and click on
<widgetname>Update</widgetname>.</cmd></step>
<step><cmd>Look at the <widgetname>Count</widgetname> field
to find out how many snow shovels are in
stock.</cmd></step>
</steps>
</taskbody>
<related-links>
<link href="../concepts/snowShovel.xml" format="xml" type="concept">
<linktext>Snow shovel</linktext></link>
<link href="../reference/inventoryWindow.xml" format="xml"
type="reference">
<linktext>Inventory window</linktext></link>
</related-links>
</task>
<concept id="snowShovel-concept" xml:lang="en-us">
<prolog><metadata>
<keywords>
<keyword>snow</keyword>
<keyword>tool</keyword>
<indexterm>tools
<indexterm>snow shovel</indexterm></indexterm>
</keywords></metadata></prolog>
<title>Snow shovel</title>
<conbody>
<p>A <indexterm>snow shovel</indexterm> snow shovel is used to
clear the driveway and sidewalk of snow in the winter.
A good snow shovel has a straight, wide <term>scoop</term> and a
strong <term>handle</term>.
To help snow come off the scoop, spray the scoop with cooking
spray.</p>
</conbody>
<related-links>
<link href="../tasks/snowShovelInventory.xml" format="xml"
type="task">
<linktext>Snow shovel inventory</linktext></link>
</related-links>
</concept>
<reference id="inventoryWindow-reference" xml:lang="en-us">
<prolog><metadata>
<keywords>
<indexterm>windows
<indexterm>Inventory Window</indexterm></indexterm>
<indexterm>fields
<indexterm>Item</indexterm></indexterm>
<indexterm>fields
<indexterm>Count</indexterm></indexterm>
</keywords></metadata></prolog>
<title>Inventory window</title>
<refbody><refsyn>
<p>The <wintitle>Inventory Window</wintitle>
provides a count of items given the name of the item.
The <widgetname>Item</widgetname> field contains the name of an item.
The <widgetname>Count</widgetname> field states how many items
with that name
are in stock according to the inventory records.</p>
</refsyn></refbody>
</reference>
-----Original Message-----
From: JoAnn Hackos [mailto:joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 10:45 AM
To: Esrig, Bruce (Bruce); Don Day; Paul Prescod
Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [dita] Keywords in DITA
I wonder if Bruce could provide an example of the distinction
between keyword as description and keyword as content. I'm not
certain I understand how they are being distinguished from this
explanation.
JoAnn
JoAnn T. Hackos, PhD
President
Comtech Services, Inc.
710 Kipling Street, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80215
303-232-7586
joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com
http://www.comtech-serv.com <http://www.comtech-serv.com/>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Esrig, Bruce (Bruce) [mailto:esrig@lucent.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2005 1:13 AM
To: 'Don Day'; Paul Prescod
Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [dita] Keywords in DITA
A future release of the architecture should provide language to
distinguish between two specializations of the archetype: a
description (keyword-as-description) and an object
(keyword-of-content). This would provide a clear distinction that
would cue authors and processing about the difference in purpose.
Not all field names or function names make good search terms, so
including all such identifiers among the candidate targets for
search impairs the specificity that users want when they search.
This means there is a benefit to being able to mark up identifiers
for special presentation in output (keyword-of-content) without
including them among search terms.
Indexterm is really a special case of keyword-as-description.
Keyword-as-description could be permitted in content to permit
authors to identify text that is to be used as a search target. It
is often convenient to mark up identifying text on first occurrence.
The clash comes when an author wants both usages simultaneously:
keyword-as-description to indicate a search target and
keyword-of-content because the identifier is a special identifier
in the content. The keyword-of-content usage must take precedence.
In order to accomodate the keyword-as-description usage, the
author could choose to write some descriptive text to hold the
keyword-as-description usage, or else place a
keyword-as-description entry in a metadata context. Although it is
tempting to use the unspecialized markup in these cases, there is
still the question of whether to trigger an index entry, so a
third specialization of the archetype (keyword-desc-and-content)
may be needed.
Best wishes,
Bruce Esrig
-----Original Message-----
From: Don Day [mailto:dond@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 11:13 PM
To: Paul Prescod
Cc: dita@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [dita] Keywords in DITA
I buy it in the strict sense, Paul, but life can be so darned
non-linear. How about this scenario:
As a content owner, I created a domain for marking up both
widgettype and widgetname words in my product descriptions,
both specialized from keyword. Authors have generally used
these elements to tag names and types throughout the content.
Later, I run a consolidation tool against my content to
retrieve all elements based on keyword, create a single copy
of each unique element/value, and put these into the keywords
metadata of the topic as a pre-processed pool that I intend to
use as search keys. Domain substitution means that the
keywords element can contain keyword as well as the elements
specialized from it--widgetname and widgettype. Although your
definitions might differentiate the name as being "API-like"
and the type as metadata, yet both are here, based on the same
element , in both content and metadata contexts. From my point
of view as a user, there is no need for too fine-grained a
definitional distinction because my domain specialization and
my subsequent use of the elements in both contexts effectively
makes the distinction moot--the specialized elements are
describing my product semantically and are providing the
consistent search/relevance behavior I desired.
My real world experience bets that most authors will be
inconsistent about what they mark up as keyword in the
metadata vs in the content. Thus jaded, I'm back to the
suggestion of keeping the description high level. keyword is
just an archetype--the significant distinctions come when it
is specialized to clearly indicate what it is for.
Regards,
--
Don Day <dond@us.ibm.com>
Chair, OASIS DITA Technical Committee
IBM Lead DITA Architect
11501 Burnet Rd., MS 9037D018, Austin TX 78758
Ph. 512-838-8550 (T/L 678-8550)
"Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"
--T.S. Eliot
"Paul Prescod" <paul.prescod@blastradius.com>
"Paul Prescod"
<paul.prescod@blastradius.com>
03/08/2005 07:45 PM
To
"JoAnn Hackos" <joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com>, Don
Day/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
cc
<dita@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject
RE: [dita] Keywords in DITA
Okay, an emerging consensus seems to be that <keyword> in
<keywords> means <keyword> in the HTML/Docbook sense.
http://www.docbook.org/tdg/en/html/keyword.html . It is
typically hidden from the user as metadata and embedded in the
HTML meta tag.
<keyword> in other contexts is more like a word from an API or
language.
Should we just document it that way? If so, I can suggest some
wordings.
Paul Prescod
|