[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Dave Winer <dave@userland.com>
- To: xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
- Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 09:31:58 -0800
We've been working on this!
Here's the solution. Come up with an editorial system where people write
the initial versions of their texts with a plain text editor, whatever they
like best. As it enters the publishing database, create an XML wrapper for
it, automatically assigning default values for all the tags, since none
were specified by the author.
Then, when the piece is to be edited, either by the original author or
another member of the team, give them the XML text, with the tags.
They figure out what's expected of them, and when they see the original
copy under the <BODY> tag, the lightbulbs go on. It's the sneaky way to get
XML into the hands of writers. They get it.
Dave
At 11:15 AM 1/12/99 -0600, Buss, Jason A wrote:
>Hello to everyone.
>
>I just subscribed to this mailing list over the last couple of days and it
>appears I have walked into a very interesting discussion.
>
>I just thought I would share a few things with everyone regarding the
>impressions and hopes that I have for XML.
>
>I could be considered a relative newcomer to XML. I have been working with
>SGML for the last 7 months or so, as part of a team that was formed to
>implement an SGML publishing system for our company. The team went through
>some reorganization, and I sort of got in at the tail end, implementation
>side of things, as most of the research, conceptualizing, and development
>had already been completed. Basically, I learned SGML by working with
>various public tools as well as the commercial software we ordered, and the
>internet. There just isn't a whole lot out there other than the materials
>generated by the individuals and organizations committed to SGML
>
>Basically, we did evaluation after evaluation of commercial software,
>decided on a publishing package from a very respected vendor. Showed it to
>our technical writers, and watched them turn on us. The lack of real
>information that came from the team to the publishing group only helped to
>exacerbate the feelings of paranoia and helplessness from writers. They
>were terrified that we were going to force everyone to learn programming. I
>have, over time and vendor improvements, shown most people that this is not
>the case. Most people hear "metalanguage", but think "language".
>
>I am no programmer by any stretch of the imagination. I was a technical
>writer and illustrator before being coaxed into SGML publishing. I was put
>off by the whole thing until I took a really close look at it. And that
>brings me to a real sore spot that I think would love to see addressed when
>people write white papers and abstracts to explain XML for the rest of us.
>The concept of SGML (and XML) is no challenge for most people to grasp, but
>the majority of published texts are so weighted down that most technical
>writers come away either crushed or confused. Many of them need to see it
>applied before they can fully grasp the application (particularly the
>syntax). I personally had to read almost ten white papers before I came
>away with everything I needed to get the whole picture.
>
>I know there are some people who are in the process of building SGML
>publishing systems who are terrified because as the information and
>resources for XML increases, the information and resources for SGML has
>trailed off somewhat. A lot of people, for whatever reason, have missed the
>XML/SGML connection, and are worried that SGML will fall out of favor, and
>not have the support it once had.
>
>And hopefully, something, or someone, will bring XML to the forefront of
>public awareness. Be it a well-branded vendor such as Microsoft (I am
>personally banking on Netscape/Sun/IBM; AOL stands to gain hand over fist
>from XML implementation), or the next Gates or Andressen or someone who can
>really push XML not only into the office for production, but into the home
>for delivery. Even the beginning web surfers quickly understand that it is
>HTML and Java applets that make all this information visible within their
>browser. Many people pick up on the concepts and syntax of HTML from there,
>going on to create their own documents/pages, but the ones who choose not to
>still understand the benefit of HTML. XML would probably be most likely to
>succeed if it has the groundswell of support or at least understanding of
>benefit from the public at large as it becomes implemented. Unfortunatlely,
>I can ask 20 people familiar with HTML, and maybe two of them have heard of
>XML. Almost none of them understand that HTML is a doctype of SGML. There
>needs to be a really simple, straightforward PR blitz aimed not only at
>publishers and document managers, but at webmasters and the general public.
>It is very commendable of Microsoft to embrace XML like they have, but it
>seems most of their papers are geared towards the industry, and promises XML
>support in their products, as opposed to informing the general public of the
>benefits to be gained from XML. People clamored for a way to share,
>transmit, and display information in an inexpensive, easy-to use format that
>could be accessible to anyone or everyone, Hence HTML, and the internet.
>Customer-driven solution. Now the challenge is to convince everyone who is
>comfortable with HTML that XML will better serve their needs and offer them
>the most benefit. Industry-driven solution.
>
>Like I said before, I have recently entered the area of metadata, but I have
>gone through most of the resources I could, and unless I am missing some
>things along the way, this seems to be where some additional focus could be
>used; explanation of benefit as well as concept and use. And to bring the
>introduction of application up to speed with the introduction of information
>and concept.
>
>BTW, has anyone noticed the variance of how techmedia has perceived XML? I
>have seen articles that say XML is the direct replacement for HTML, while I
>have seen others that say XML is a compliment to HTML, and HTML will never
>really be phased out at this point. With this in mind, I got a somewhat
>panicked phone call from someone who came across the W3C draft for rewriting
>HTML 4.0 as an XML application recently. I was able to dispel his alarm,
>but the concern was somewhat understandable. Any comments??
>
>Jason A. Buss
>Single Engine Technical Publications
>Cessna Aircraft Co.
>jabuss@cessna.textron.com
>
>
>
>
>xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
>Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
>To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
>(un)subscribe xml-dev
>To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
>subscribe xml-dev-digest
>List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
>
>
-----------------------------
http://www.scriptingnews.com/
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|
