[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Author Index (this month)][Thread Index (this month)][Top of Archive]

RE: Comparison of XML tools for writing documents

Subject: RE: Comparison of XML tools for writing documents
From: quills -at- airmail -dot- net
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:35:49 -0600


At 10:51 AM -0800 1/20/05, Nagai, Paul wrote:



Provide Epic with a DTD and a matching XML file, and it can open, edit, and save that XML file. My understanding is that FrameMaker would require EDDs and write rules to be able to do that. Am I wrong?


The only person who can claim they're working with "native"
XML is someone who writes and tags in ASCII text.

Maybe I have misused language somewhere, but there is a class of tools that I would say work with native XML: XMLSpy, Epic, etc. The open, edit, validate, and write out XML based on the XML itself and a DTD. FrameMaker is not in that class.

You only have to use EDD in FrameMaker to format printing. The XML is written in TEXT, and the code is validated in FrameMaker using your DTD.

A powerful text editor (I like Textpad) is a valuable tool in the toolbox of every person supporting an XML environment. Don't, however, fail to distinguish between modifying XML files with a text editor and editing XML. Maybe I'm making something up here, but there is a difference. Using your text editor *you* are responsible for the validity of that file when you are done. With an XML editor, *it* is responsible for validity. I'm not sure that I would say editing XML *files* with a text editor is working with native XML in the context of an "XML editor discussion." But hey, that's semantics ...


> Yes, you can modify Frame to add CMS capabilities to the
> menus. Epic provides an adapter for Documentum (the CMS we
> selected) that permits checkout/checkin (and other CMS
> > functionality) from within the Epic client.

If you are saving as XML, you have a text file. Use any blinking versioning software you want.

That is my take on this. Anyone else have their 2 cents worth to add?

Scott

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

WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT - EDIT AND REVIEW, REDEFINED
Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo:
http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l

Technical Communication Certificate online - Malaspina-University College, Canada. Online training in technical writing, software (FrameMaker, RoboHelp, Dreamweaver, Acrobat), document & web design, writing manuals, job search. www.pr.mala.bc.ca/tech_comm.htm for details.

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


References:
RE: Comparison of XML tools for writing documents: From: Nagai, Paul

Previous by Author: Re: Rational Requisite and ClearCase for Application Docs?
Next by Author: Re: New TECHWR-L Poll Question - Contracting
Previous by Thread: RE: Comparison of XML tools for writing documents
Next by Thread: RE: Comparison of XML tools for writing documents

[Top of Archive] | [Author Index (this month)] | [Thread Index (this month)]

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

Sponsored Ads