[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] DocBook Customization
Hi Eric, the proposals are archived on the public DocBook TC list: http://markmail.org/message/hp4bfbybnsfimyoc http://markmail.org/message/ig2rmioc6bljwiqk We are still considering the structures involved, so we welcome any feedback! I have a distinct interest in DocBook/DITA interoperability as well, so we will certainly try to enable interop where possible! Thanks and best regards, --Scott Scott Hudson Senior XML Architect +1 (303) 542-2146 | Office +1 (303) 332-1883 | Cell Scott.Hudson@flatironssolutions.com ========================================== Flatirons Solutions http://www.flatironssolutions.com Eric Johnson wrote: > I'd like to know more about he modular DocBook stuff. Are there any > early drafts of the proposal or information I could look at? > > Will it make interop between DocBook and DITA easier? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Hudson [mailto:scott.hudson@flatironssolutions.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 9:23 PM > To: Bob Stayton > Cc: Eric Johnson; DocBook Apps ML > Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] DocBook Customization > > If you want to "start" with a simplified version of DocBook, you should > check out the Simplified DocBook DTD or the new Publishers schema. These > are "official" customizations that minimize the number of elements. > > With the proposed Modular DocBook addition to the standard (likely > v5.1), there soon will be a way to more easily work at a topic level > while remaining in DocBook compliance. > > I second Eric's opinion that there is no DITA XSL: The Complete Guide, > so the customization for DITA is much more challenging! > > Best regards, > > --Scott > > 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]