Re: Giving up on XML

["Mike Starr" <mikestarr-techwr-l -at- writestarr -dot- com>]

It also occurs to me that adopting a tool that imposes structured 
documentation doesn't do anything at all to impose consistent structure. I 
can have a boatload of content that's all structured with none of it 
structurally similar.

Mike
--
Mike Starr                            WriteStarr Information Services
Technical Writer   -   Online Help Developer   -    Website developer
Graphic Designer    -    Desktop Publisher   -       MS Office Expert
Phone: (262) 694-1028 - Tollfree: (877) 892-1028 - Fax:(262) 697-6334
Email: mike -at- writestarr -dot- com      -      Web: http://www.writestarr.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Borokowski" <athloi -at- yahoo -dot- com>
To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 9:04 AM
Subject: Re: Giving up on XML

>I was intrigued by this recent writing:
>
> "The most commonly-stated reasons for adopting
> structured documentation techniques include:
> Automation, Reuse, Single-sourcing, Productivity gains
> (resulting from the above)
>
> However, none of these (or other) advantages require
> structuring at all. Non-SGML markup languages such as
> troff or TeX, and even help-authoring tools like
> RoboHelp, all allow automation, reuse, and
> single-sourcing.
>
> Another purported benefit of structured authoring is
> that it enforces consistency both within a document
> and across a suite of related documents. Again,
> structure is not necessary to gain this benefit: a
> properly-designed style sheet (combined with good
> old-fashioned peer pressure) is sufficient."
>
> http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-BLFrRSM1crQ40jjr38W8Q2JQtELQ?p=9
>
> I agree on some levels: structured documents, like
> virtualization, are an overhyped trend.
>
> On another level, I find them useful in that they are
> often machine parseable.
>
> On still another level, I find the convergence of RDF
> and XML interesting as XML is a structural markup,
> while RDF is a value-typing/definitional markup.
>
> Kollar made some good points about the utility of
> simply a style sheet and some common sense. I think
> the dumbing-down of authoring to the point where
> machines could do it is a silly idea. On the other
> hand, I like the thought of writing information into
> an XML format, tagging it with RDF-style definitional
> markup, and then putting a kind of data tainting on it
> so it knows where to go, whether a public CMS or a
> private intranet. Letting the machines work for us, in
> other words. 

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

Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or 
printed documentation. Features include single source authoring, team authoring,
Web-based technology, and PDF output. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList

Now shipping: Help &amp; Manual 4 with RoboHelp(r) import! New editor,
full Unicode support. Create help files, web-based help and PDF in up
to 106 languages with Help &amp; Manual: http://www.helpandmanual.com

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- 

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.