Re: [docbook] ONIX 3 <-> Docbook 5 Mapping

[Peter Fleck <peterfleck@gmail.com>]

Thanks Thomas,

May be I'm tackling the issue wrongly and would value advise if so:

1. When we receive a proposal for a book, whether print or eBook, the preliminary metadata is entered into a database.
2. After a review process a decision is made to publish or reject the work.
3. If the work goes ahead I was hoping to create the Docbook <info> out of the database automatically and a separate ONIX file for distribution channels.
4. The production staff would then take the Docbook file and follow through to completion.
   

That was why I was wonder if there was mapping so the database could drive the XML files for both production and marketing.
Is there a better way of doing it?

Peter

On 16/05/2014 10:08, Thomas Schraitle wrote:

Hi,

On Fri, 16 May 2014 09:29:56 +0200
Peter Fleck <peterfleck@gmail.com> wrote:

[...]
Before starting the work myself I was wondering if there is a mapping 
between ONIX 3 and Docbook 5?

I don't know and I'm not sure if it makes sense to "rewrite" ONIX
elements into DocBook elements. 

Theoretically, you *could* find some mappings, (ab)use the role or
remap attributes. However, I doubt it will be a "good" solution in
terms of clarity and semantics.

To my knowledge, both can be downloaded as RELAX NG schema. Why not
incorporate ONIX elements into DocBook's <info> element? 

They both belong to a different namespace, no conflicts would be
created. It shouldn't be that difficult to extend DocBook (although I
haven't tried it).

That way you don't "abuse" DocBook elements and they stay semantically
the same. In terms of stylesheet customization, you don't have to
change the standard DocBook template rules. That's also a plus I
think: They stay the same, so no surprises. 

The only step you have to take is to implement a different behaviour
for your ONIX elements. But you only need this step, if you really want
to make them appear on a titlepage, for example.