Re: [doc-mgmt] Standardized XML format for OASIS documents or documentmetadata

[Matthew MacKenzie <matt@yellowdragonsoft.com>]

I never suggested we 'mandate' an editing tool, merely that OASIS 
provide licenses for one in the event that we do mandate an XML format 
for the specifications.  I think the W3C does this, and that is probably 
why they have been successful in keeping people away from proprietary 
editing programs.

-matt
Drummond Reed wrote:

>As a long time document automation advocate, I want to second John's
>suggestion that while I don't think it will ever be practical (or even
>desirable) to mandate an editing tool, it does make sense to mandate a
>common format. The more support the format has, the more editing tools
>that will support it. (Look how universal HTML support is now.)
> 
>It would be nirvana to also have a WebDAV interface to that common
>format, so our different editing tools could all interact with the OASIS
>repository directly.
> 
>=Drummond 
> 
>-----Original Message-----
>From: John Kemp [mailto:john.kemp@earthlink.net]
>Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 10:31 AM
>To: Matthew MacKenzie
>Cc: Drummond Reed; doc-mgmt@lists.oasis-open.org; Gabe Wachob (E-mail);
>Marc LeMaitre
>Subject: Re: [doc-mgmt] Standardized XML format for OASIS documents or
>document metadata
> 
>Matt,
>
>As someone who has recently led an effort to standardize on using
>DocBook for single-source publishing of our specifications, I would
>agree that it is difficult to get people to edit DocBook. Based on my
>experience, I don't see how we will ever get people entirely away from
>using something like MS Word to author documents (unless better products
>come along that duplicate Word's functionality, but are more open with
>their file formats). But, I think there is a path that leads between the
>two - if we can specify that (for example) the canonical source format
>for Oasis documents is DocBook XML, and find ways to translate from
>Word, OpenOffice or other formats to DocBook, then I think this approach
>can succeed. 
>
>I won't deny that there is a significant effort involved in building a
>publication system based on DocBook, but, there are some significant
>advantages:
>
>1) DocBook is a textual format, which makes it much better for
>identifying differences between versions of a document. Many versioning
>systems can't diff binary files.
>2) Publication to HTML or PDF (or even RTF) can all be accomplished from
>the same source document, with no editing changes. 
>3) Document publication can be largely automated, and it's even possible
>to generate the latest copies of documents on the fly (Apache Cocoon is
>starting to make that possible). 
>
>We publish the majority of the Liberty Project specifications using
>DocBook, and given the number of documents now involved in that project,
>I am very happy to be able to type a single command and have the system
>go off and make all of the latest document versions. So, I would highly
>recommend using DocBook, and although specifying a good WYSIWYG editing
>tool is one approach to this problem, another is to specify tools that
>can translate reliably between Word/OpenOffice and DocBook. 
>
>And, after all, DocBook is an OASIS project!
>
>Cheers,
>
>- JohnK
>
>________________________________
>John Kemp<?fontfamily><?param Helvetica><?bigger>
>/<?/bigger><?/fontfamily> john.kemp@earthlink.net
>(+1) 413.458.9053 / frumioj@AOL
>Coordinating Editor / Project Liberty
>
>On Monday, Jun 2, 2003, at 17:31 US/Eastern, Matthew MacKenzie wrote:
>I'm a big fan of using something like DocBook XML to author specs, and
>have the OASIS system manage all of the XSL to dynamically deliver the
>document, but to do this sort of thing requires OASIS to provide a
>license to some sort of WYSIWYG tool to all OASIS editors.
>
>I've tried and failed to get various OASIS'ers to use docbook, they
>always complain that it is to complicated...and it is too complicated
>for 90% of us.
>
>So, I'll add "editing tool" to Drummond's suggestion below.
>
>-Matt
>
>Drummond Reed wrote:
>On today's doc-mgmt call I was reminded of the advantages that W3C has
>enjoyed by standardizing on the format for their deliverables, and in
>particular of making sure that at least metadata concerning any official
>W3C document is available in a standard XML format.
>
>This is almost an extension of the requirement for persistent URIs, as
>essentially it says that not only will there be a constant point at
>which the document can be referenced, but a consistent way to query and
>obtain metadata about the document that exists at that point (without
>necessarily having to download or access the entire document).
>
>Providing a machine-readable, programmable interface to all OASIS
>documents will, I suspect, be invaluable as OASIS specifications are
>increasingly integrated with other XML specifications and repositories.
>
>=Drummond
>
>To unsubscribe from this list please send a post to
>doc-mgmt-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this list please send a post to
>doc-mgmt-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this list please send a post to doc-mgmt-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org.
>
>
>  
>