Re: Baiting for the single source rant

Subject: Re: Baiting for the single source rant
From: SIANNON -at- VISUS -dot- JNJ -dot- com
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 8:32:58

Andrew Plato responds:
>> The bottom line is that what this rant is about,
>> is that we are all trying to reduce the authoring
>> of redundant text we have to author and maintain
>> over a document's life cycle
>
> No we're not. I am not trying to reduce redundant text
> authoring. Many of my clients could care less about
> this issue. We are way more concerned with the technical
> accuracy of the text. God (aka B. Gates) invented
> copy/paste to handle redundant text. We surely don't
> need to spend 2 years and $900,000 to solve a problem
> I can solve with [CTRL][c] / [CTRL][V].

The problem with redundant text for many of us isn't the actual
implementation of the updates, but remembering where the updates are
scattered within the docs: this one point needs to be updated in 5 places,
while this other one needs to be updated in 3 places, and this other one in
6 places, often among different docs. While I can honestly say I have a
more comprehensive understanding of the system as a whole than any of the
individuals on the development team, I cannot instantly recall in how many
places details about the structure, sequencing and derivation of unique
carton IDs may appear (especially when they can be generated by at least
five different functions, spanning two different applications, using three
different algorithms).

I think a lot of people are employing single sourcing not for the
implementation of changes, but rather for the help in mapping where
replicated conceptual elements appear in the docs. Often these replicated
concepts manifest with different levels of detail, different tones and
perspectives, depending on the doc in which they are used. In this
instance, only Bill's third example of single-source usage would be usable,
and it could have serious potential issues. Whether those issues outweigh
the assistance the methodology could provide in maintaining the content
integrity is the fuzzy part.

That's why my question for the rant is not "should single sourcing be
used?" but rather "how would single sourcing address these specific
issues,--and could it be effective?" As of yet, this question is
unanswered, because the focus has been on the mainstream usage of the
technology (understandably), which predominantly focuses on the management
of output, not content. I'm trying to identify whether single-sourcing, as
a tool/method, is capable of addressing a specific content-management need:
providing a cross-document conceptual index for use in identifying
downstream revisions needed after an incremental change in a specific
element within a complex system. (lather, rinse, repeat)

Most systems I've seen cannot be used for this effectively, because they
are too focused on repurposing into specific formats, and therefore
constrict the way you can organize document elements. It's one reason I'm
trying to gain a better understanding of AuthorIT, since that is the first
prepackaged system I've seen that allows such an extensive level of
granularity -- I'm still having a dickens of a time dealing with the user
interface on the demo version, so the jury is out on it right now.

I've been intrigued by some of the homebrewed systems mentioned here that
work with markup languages, user-defined tags, and database repositories,
but I haven't been able to determine whether they come closer to what I'm
thinking of. It may be an imaginary beast, in the end, but right now it is
still but a question.

Anyone here have opinions on this? (yes, I know I'm asking for it)


Shauna Iannone
Tech Writer, American Computing Technologies,
currently supporting 3GT CIM at Vistakon
--------------------------------------------
I think, therefore I thwim.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A landmark hotel, one of America's most beautiful cities, and
three and a half days of immersion in the state of the art:
IPCC 01, Oct. 24-27 in Santa Fe. http://ieeepcs.org/2001/

+++ Miramo -- Database/XML publishing automation. See us at +++
+++ Seybold SFO, Sept. 25-27, in the Adobe Partners Pavilion +++
+++ More info: http://www.axialinfo.com http://www.miramo.com +++

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.


Previous by Author: RE: Baiting for the single source rant
Next by Author: OT: Pertinent words
Previous by Thread: RE: Baiting for the single source rant
Next by Thread: ADMIN: Don't ascribe to malice that which can ...


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads