Re: [FrameSGML] Re: Office 2003 Beta (long)

[DW Emory <danemory@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 03:05 PM 3/25/03 -0500, eric.dunn@ca.transport.bombardier.com wrote
>Sorry, but you've lost me with your reasoning. If the writer was using a
>structured authoring approach the formatting is not important.

Really? If it's not important? Why then does an EDD have format rules?

>The STRUCTURE is
>important and that has not been lost. There is no "writer's intent" in the
>formatting.

In a structured Frame document, the "writer's intent" is replaced by the
EDD and template designer's intent, which is to specifically address
issues of readability, enhancement of comprehension and meaning,
and (often) corporate document standards whose purposes (even in
formatting) are to assure that the document maximizes product usability
and safety.

>Now if you want the content to display the same in different
>mediums/programs, then yes an automatic generator of XSL/DSSL would be helpful
>to avoid repetitive work on the part of the design effort.

Precisely what I was saying.

>But the originator did not FORMAT the content. The originator STRUCTURED the
>content.

The "originator" includes not only the writer, but also the corporate 
entity which
developed the EDD, its format rules, and the companion structured template 
which
specifies how the format rules are implemented by various types of format tags.
As much as possible, corporations would like at least the option of formatting
an exported SGML or XML document so that it resembles as much as possible
the original format and layout design in the originating author/editor 
software.
If a user develops an XSL instance which materially alters the original format
and layout in such a way as to detract from readability, comprehension,
safety or product usability, that's the fault of the user, not the 
corporate originator.
Thus, for instance, the corporate originator might be protected from
product liability claims if the user-generated version differs 
significantly from
the original document. An example might be that the user's version of the
document does a lousy job of formatting Notes Cautions and Warnings,
such that they might be easily overlooked, whereas the original version 
produced
by the originator has formatting of the same safety information.

><<<<
>Right now, that's not possible using FrameMaker to originate structured
>documents.
>But achieving that goal, not only for format but also for layout, is, I hope,
>what the OpenOffice initiative by Oasis is all about.
> >>>>
>
>Sorry, but that sounds like rubbish to me. If FORMATTING is a main concern 
>then
>you'll end up with documentation that looks like it was designed by committee.

Your statement above is utter rubbish. Why, if you don't
think formatting is a "main concern", are you using FrameMaker  with an EDD,
format rules, and a template to develop your documents? If the result of a 
well-designed
EDD/template combination is a document that looks like it was designed by
a committee, what alternative approach are you recommending which improves
on that approach? Is it the approach used by most Word users of applying 
the Normal tag to all
paragraphs, and then applying various format overrides to each paragraph? Such
documents don't look like they were done by committees, they look like they 
were
done by Jackson Pollock.

>Formatting is the realm of the DTP/Display program. Frame has sideheads, Word
>does not. Should there be an XML standard for sideheads? Of course not. It's
>only a style of heading. It's also an area of innovation. One vendor has 
>found a
>good formatting trick. You choose the production software based on those
>formatting tricks. When you change production environments you'll always 
>have to
>do a gap analysis and overcome the shortfalls.

Of course. But the goal is to minimize the variation from the original, and 
to come
up with an approach that can work with the widest possible variety of DTPs. 
That, I
believe what the OpenOffice initiative is up to. And that initiative recognizes
that the ability to duplicate the original layout is a missing ingredient 
in XML/XSL.


>Otherwise the utopic dream of "open" document standards is replaced with the
>Stalinist nightmare of everyone stuck with the same output.

The "Stalinist nightmare is epitomized by most of the "standard" DTDs already
out there. The DTD being developed by Oasis's OpenOffice initiative is 
intended to be extensible
(i.e., adaptable), and, if it's done right, will probably be less Stalinist 
than most DTDs.


FrameMaker/FrameMaker+SGML Document Design & Database Publishing
DW Emory <danemory@globalcrossing.net>


** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **