I agree with Rick's points. But there are situations where it might not
be worth the effort digging deep in the available material for a
so-called standard, when -- in the end -- the customized solution still
needs non-standard modifications.

As an example: DocBook comes with many more elements than you will
likely use and the available XSL transformations deal with almost all of
them. During all your initial setup work and all maintenance steps you
will somehow have to deal with a lot of stuff you never use.

I learned that the maintenance effort is somehow proportional to the
number of elements and attributes in a DTD. So from my point of view it
is a good idea to start with a DTD/Schema as simple as possible. If you
add elements or attributes during your testing phase you do not
invalidate existing documents.

A good example of such a minimalistic approach is the DocFrame
environment created by Scriptorium Publ. IMO it is a perfect head-start
for FrameMaker users.

http://scriptorium.com/docframe/

If you need/want to be compatible with some other structure later on,
you can create an XSL stylesheet to take care of that compatibility.

- Michael

On 01.02.2006 14:58, Rick Quatro schrieb/wrote:
> The main advantages to using one of the standard schemas:
> 
> 1) It has been developed and used by others so it has the benefit of
> being tested and "proven" with actual documentation.
> 
> 2) Even if it needs to be customized, you have a head-start in the
> development process.
> 
> 3) If there is already an EDD, etc., for the standard, you can try it
> out before spending a lot of time or money.
> 
> 4) There will be other users and developers that you can solicit for
> help and advice.
> 
> 5) There may be existing tools (templates, XSLT stylesheets, etc.) that
> you can use in your environment.
> 
> Rick Quatro
> Carmen Publishing
> 585-659-8267
> www.frameexpert.com
> 
> 
>> The "Real Life" Migration to Stuctured Doc thread got me thinking.
>> What is
>> better? A custom schema or one the "standards" such as Docbook or DITA.
>>
>> I've often thought that if one knows how to create a schema (and the
>> resulting EDD, DTD, XSD, etc.) you're better off creating your own,
>> especially since Docbook and, to a lesser extent, DITA would need to be
>> customized to realize the true potential of XML.
>>
>> I'm curious as to what others think about this.
>>
>> ---
>> Mike Feimster

-- 
_______________________________________________________________
Michael M?ller-Hillebrand: Dokumentations-Technologien
Experte f?r FrameMaker, FrameScript, XML/XSL, WWP, PHP/MySQL...
--> Training on-the-job - effizienter geht es nicht! <--
http://cap-studio.de/ -- Tel. +49 (9131) 28747

Reply via email to