[Fwd: Re: DocBook Subcommittee for eLearning]

[Scott Hudson <scott.hudson@flatironssolutions.com>]

FYI.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: DocBook Subcommittee for eLearning
Date: 	Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:21:15 -0600
From: 	Hudson, Scott <Scott.Hudson@flatironssolutions.com>
To: 	allynr@learnilities.com.au <allynr@learnilities.com.au>
CC: 	John Hunt <john_hunt@us.ibm.com>, Don Day <dond@us.ibm.com>, Joann 
Hackos <Joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com>
References: 	<4ADF61D8.3000802@learnilities.com.au>



Hi Allyn, et al,

I'm glad to hear the news is getting out on this effort!

Writers have been using DocBook for modular publishing since its begging 
utilizing XML modularity features like external entities and later on 
XIncludes. What is now happening, is the addition of features to 
explicitly support modular content via markup.

As one of the strongest features in DITA is modularity, I thought there 
was a really good fit for delivering modular training or eLearning 
content. John and I discussed this quite a bit, which resulted in 
forming the DITA Learning Content specialization.

With the experience of the DITA Learning Content specialization, and 
with DocBook adding support for modular content, I have also felt that 
the DocBook standard could also benefit it's constituency by adding 
support for eLearning. Many technical documentation groups already use 
DocBook, and then "throw content over the wall" to a training group that 
ends up using a different set of tools to massage that content into a 
format that they can deliver. What would happen if they both could use a 
common standard and toolset? I think greater efficiencies can be achieved!

Also, many training groups have been using DocBook for several years for 
various course
materials. I know of at least two efforts that have added their own 
custom tags to DocBook to improve e-learning capability of format. There 
is clearly demand from the user community for this functionality.

All this to say that I am very much interested in aligning the work of 
DocBook and DITA. I wouldn't have proposed an Interoperability 
Framework, if I wasn't serious about that!  I am, indeed, looking at 
being able to provide compatibility and interoperability between these 
specifications. I think we are trying to apply best practices in 
eLearning and learning methodologies on both standards efforts, so I 
would hope to achieve considerable alignment. At a minimum, I'd like to 
be "one transform away" from interoperable content.

What I strongly disagree with are assumptions that DITA or DocBook are 
the ONLY game in town. Each have their strengths and weaknesses and 
should be considered equally when applying them to a given implementation.

The DocBook for eLearning effort is intended to offer choice, as well as 
meet the needs of the existing user community.

As participation is open to any OASIS member, I have been planning to 
open up an invitation for any OASIS member with eLearning experience to 
contribute! First, I needed to confirm with the DocBook community and TC 
that there was enough interest and motivation to support the effort. We 
would welcome the participation of folks from the DITA Learning Content 
SC because of their vast experience in this area as well.

Perhaps from that perspective, we can achieve a level of alignment as well!

Please let me know if you have any questions or are interested in 
participating. We are planning to meet The 2nd Tuesday of the month at 
14:00:00 UTC, which would be Tue 4:00 PM in Prague, Tue 10:00 AM Eastern 
and Tue 8:00 AM Mountain. Due to a conflict I have in November, we will 
actually kick off the SC on Nov 3rd, then resume the regular schedule.

Thanks and best regards,

--Scott

Scott Hudson
Senior XML Architect
+1 (303) 542-2146  |  Office
+1 (720) 663-SCOT [7268]  |  Gvoice
Scott.Hudson@flatironssolutions.com
http://www.flatironssolutions.com






Allyn J Radford wrote:
> Hi Scott
>
> The announcement of the DocBook Subcommittee for eLearning has created a 
> bit of interest and interaction with folks in the LETSI community.  This 
> is probably a good thing, however, the interrelationship of the work to 
> be done in DocBook with other OASIS work (eg DITA Learning 
> Specialization) and beyond OASIS to other communities such as S1000D etc 
> may not be understood by those beyond the DocBook community.
>
> Personally, I think there is advantage if having specific eLearning 
> capability developed for book-based formats because some people will 
> want to stay in that domain.  If, however, the directions of efforts in 
> DITA and DocBook go down different pathways, then this can just add 
> complication and effort to those interested in working with structured 
> content for learning requirements.
>
> The gist of the messages amongst LETSI members this morning was more 
> about the alignment of these bodies of work and the ability to further 
> align with work outside of OASIS.  Are you able to shed some light on 
> this?  It would be very useful if minimal effort was required to use 
> content more openly between communities and if the adoption of both DITA 
> and DocBook was spurred by the simplest forms of compatibility and 
> interoperability between specifications, especially those from the same 
> standards body.
>
> I look forward to some comment as soon as you are able so that this can 
> also be fed into the LESI discussions.
>
> Thanks and regards
> Allyn
>
>   

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 8.5.424 / Virus Database: 270.14.46/2477 - Release Date: 11/02/09 19:39:09