That makes sense. Thanks. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ridder, Fred [] 
Subject: RE: Reasons to Structure

The point is that you tag a UI element as a UI element because it is a UI 
element. You make it bold (or whatever) at a later point in the process based 
on how you choose to format the semantically tagged elements for a given 
deliverable. The element itself is tagged according to what kind of information 
it is, so the tagging is basically meta-information that has added value to 
your content because it can be used in all sorts of post-processing operations.

Semantic tagging of in-line elements (like names of parameters and API 
functions) is so valuable that our pubs group was doing it in our Word 
documentation many before we transitioned to Frame, which was several years 
before we were acquired by Intel and even more years before Intel sold off that 
business unit and all those documents.

My opinions only; I don't speak for Intel.
Fred Ridder (fred dot ridder at intel dot com) Intel Parsippany, NJ

-----Original Message-----
Subject: RE: Reasons to Structure

Sorry to be so delinquent in responding to this; I have my excuses.

Some of us actually LIKE the left-brain right-brain gear shifting and are quite 
efficient at it. Mind you, I am a great proponent of structured authoring in 
theory and a miserable practitioner. Maybe it is because I am blessed with a 
mind that is peculiarly both analytical and creative in more-or-less equal 

Besides-with the caveat that I have not actually experienced *enforced* 
structured authoring, per s?-if you need to format a word or phrase for 
emphasis or for special recognition (such as bolding UI elements), don't you 
still have to tag that content somewhere? So where is the great advantage? 

As I understand structured authoring (with my admittedly limited 
understanding), its strengths seem to lie more in the realm of freeing the 
author from having to make specific adhoc formatting decisions that may or 
(more likely) may not be consistent. That, and enforcing certain rules about 
what content is required, accepted, optional, etc. 

Is it not so? 

Chuck Beck 

Reply via email to