Carrie
XSLT is short for Extensible Stylesheet Language Transformations . It is
a programming language used to transform XML from one syntax to HTML,
plain text, or another XML syntax, etc.
For example. Lets say you have an XML file that looks like this:
<Document>
<Heading>Hello World</Heading>
<Paragraph>Lorem Ipsum . . .</Paragraph>
</Document>
You can use XSLT to transform it to the following HTML:
<html>
...
<body>
<h1>Hello World</h1>
<p>Lorem Ipsum . . .</p>
</body>
</html>
This is an XML technology, not a structured Frame technology, but you
can incorporate it with structured Frame.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
rs.com] On Behalf Of Carrie Baker
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 1:08 PM
To: Scott Prentice
Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: Re: Getting data from xml into Frame was,Do I need to jump into
the Structured FM pool?
As I hoped I am getting some interesting answers.
However, since I have not worked on structured Frame yet, and am not
so famailiar with the terminology, can you explain was an XSLT
transformation is?
On 5/21/07, Scott Prentice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Carrie...
>
> For starters, you should get ahold of an XML diff tool (just google
"xml
> diff", and you'll see lots of options) so you can determine exactly
what
> has changed between versions of this XML file. You should be able to
get
> one of your developers to write an XSLT transformation that would
> generate a list of the parameters in the file, and you can compare
that
> list to a "TOC" list generated from your Frame file .. this will let
you
> determine what's missing or extra.
>
> In an ideal world, you might consider authoring the "descriptions" of
> the parameters and fields in XML (in Frame or another XML editor),
then
> run an XSLT transformation on the "descriptions" file and the file
> provided by development to generate the source for your final
> documentation. You'd just open the generated file in Frame (after
> setting up a structure application), and it would be ready to print.
The
> EDD could be set up to render any missing descriptions with a big red
> "MISSING DESCRIPTION" note, in which case you'd add that to the
> descriptions file and regenerate.
>
> Obviously this would take some time and money to set up, but in the
long
> run will probably save a lot. Just having the ability to easily diff
the
> versions of the XML file will probably be a big improvement though.
>
> Good luck!
>
> ...scott
>
> Scott Prentice
> Leximation, Inc.
> www.leximation.com
> +1.415.485.1892
>
>
>
> Carrie Baker wrote:
> > Slightly connected to this.
> > We have Frame 7.2, not structured and are doing fine.
> > We are a small (understaffed) department of 2 half time writers.
> > There is one very large chapter of a user guide which is based on
> > information from the programmers .xml file.
> > Their xml file consists of a list of parameters with various
> > explanations about them. This file is used by the application.
> > As writers we need to list all of these parameters and explain them.
> > Documentation began when the list was a very small list. The SME
gave
> > us a word file which was eventually converted to Frame with the
> > information the users required.
> > Since then everything has grown a lot.
> > The xml file now contains a over 2000 parameters.
> > Various tech writers worked on it over the years and at some point a
> > lot of parameters were missed out.
> > For every product release a large number of parameters are added to
> > the list.
> > The problem I am facing is how to identify the parameters that are
> > currently missing from the Frame file, and in the future how to
> > smoothly make sure the file is kept up to date. As new features are
> > developed R&D tell us which parameters are added, but if parameters
> > are changed or removed we do not really have a way of tracking.
> > R&D tried to give us an Excel file (i.e. they opened their xml file
in
> > Excel and saved it for us....), but it actually messed up the
> > information, since there were also sub groups of parameters (e.g.
> > parameter x contains the following 50 fields, then each field
appeared
> > as a stand alone parameter).
> >
> > As is mentioned below, Frame knows how to talk to xml, so what I am
> > looking for is whether someone can tell me, how I can make my
> > alphabetical list in FrameMaker (which I am willing to turn into a
> > table or something else), talk directly to the xml list to see what
is
> > missing from my list and in future easily identify what to add.
> > However, the entire content of the 2 lists are not identical, since
> > the Frame file (or user guide) has to give the user a full
explanation
> > of the meaning of each parameter, which the .xml file does not do.
> >
> > (or what can I ask R&D to do to help us, as each time they only give
> > us this messed up Excel file)
> >
> > (Oh and my boss does not want to spend too much time on this!)
> >
______________________________________________________________________
> >
> > Marcus wrote
> >
> > "Structure can certainly help - if you store your manuals in XML all
the
> > manual work can be eliminated. Chances are your bug tracking system
can
> > export reports in XML. An XSLT stylesheet can very easily replace
the
> > existing version of this information so when next you open the
> > document in
> > FrameMaker, the data is all updated.
> >
> > Of course, this open up myriad possibilities for customisation of
the bug
> > information - separation of code and interface bugs, ordering by
severity
> > for developers and date for managers, whatever you can imagine.
> >
> > The point is that generating this information is best accomplished
by
> > your
> > bug tracking software, not by FrameMaker. It can generate a report
of
> > open
> > bugs, so why would you want to do exactly that in FrameMaker? You
may
> > want
> > to dump it all into FrameMaker and conditionally display it -
providing
> > different views for different audiences is very much part of what
> > FrameMaker should be responsible for.
> >
> > Probably the biggest gain that you can get out of XML is the ability
to
> > make your information span applications, but to do so you obviously
need
> > to look wider than FrameMaker. You're doing software manuals by the
sound
> > of it, so you presumably have access to programmers. If I was you,
the
> > first step would be sit down with a couple of them and see if you
have
> > the
> > resources to develop a scalable, robust system. I recommend against
the
> > "toe in the water" approach - I've seen too many people spending too
much
> > time trying to gradually improve them into the system that they knew
they
> > wanted but weren't brave enough to embark on in the first place.
> >
> > Measure twice, cut once and have fun!"
> >
> >
> > Marcus
> > _____________________________________________________________
> > Carrie Baker
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
>
>
--
Carrie Baker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to Framers as
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/mike.feimster%40acst
echnologies.com
Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com
Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
