[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] DocBook Customization
> In terms of the cost of customization, I have found customizing the > DocBook 4 DTD to be easier than customizing the DITA DTDs. Talk about complex transforms: I've been using DITA recently, and the OT stylesheets look pretty intimidating to me - and no 'DITA XSL The Complete Guide' to help sort them out! Bob Stayton wrote: > Hi Eric, > My impression is that many groups adopt DITA because they want to work > in topics rather than chapters. Then they do whatever is needed to use > DITA to write topics. I have been in contact with more than one group > that has adopted DITA without any DTD customization. As you say, people > often do crazy things. 8^) > > One common DocBook customization practice is to cut down on the number > of elements. There are several reasons why: > > a. When using an XML editor that presents a list of valid tag names, > the list can be quite long in many contexts (such as inlines). Many > such elements are never to be used, so remove them from sight. > > b. Reducing ambiguity in choosing among similar elements. > > c. Reducing the complexity of a stylesheet customization. If you know > you are only supporting certain elements you don't need to have > templates for all elements. > > d. Reduce the complexity of the para element by removing block element > children (making it like simpara). > > It is possible to make a subset that still produces documents that > validate with the full DocBook schema. But of course not the other way > around. > > In terms of the cost of customization, I have found customizing the > DocBook 4 DTD to be easier than customizing the DITA DTDs. In DITA's > DTDs, everything is a twice-removed parameter entity, and it is hard to > keep track of where an element is actually declared and what children it > can contain. DocBook 4 uses parameter entities, but not to such a > complex degree. DocBook 5's RelaxNG grammar is even easier to > customize, once you learn the grammar. > > Bob Stayton > Sagehill Enterprises > bobs@sagehill.net <mailto:bobs@sagehill.net> > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Eric Johnson <mailto:EMJOHNSO@progress.com> > *To:* DocBook Apps ML <mailto:docbook-apps@lists.oasis-open.org> > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:11 AM > *Subject:* [docbook-apps] DocBook Customization > > I was talking to someone last night and they mentioned that the > biggest use case, and the one that is causing everyone to flock to > DITA, for using DocBook is to take the schema and then customize it. > > My first reaction was to think "That's completely crazy. This person > is obviously just a DITA cultist and seeing the world through tinted > lenses." Then the cynic in me piped up and said "People often do > crazy things." > > Is this a big use case in the DocBook world? Do organizations start > with standard DocBook and then tweak it around to make some > customized version of the schema that is no longer DocBook? > > Why would an organization customize DocBook instead of adopting DITA > which is built with the (almost) requirement that it be customized? > > What is the cost of doing the customization? > One of the reasons my group adopted DocBook was that the schema did > not need to be customized. We had to create a few guidelines around > using certain tags, but that was much easier than modifying the > schema. Perhaps in larger groups using the schema to enforce rules > is more desirable. >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]