On 9/29/10 4:46 PM, "Wendell Piez" <[email protected]> wrote: > So a journal publisher may start with NLM as an interchange format > for materials submitting to Pubmed Central. But then they discover > that investments made there can pay off further back in the document > workflow. There are already some early movers using NLM variants > behind production systems (some of them not small). This means there > is opportunity for editing applications in this space, if not for > much authoring as such (conversion vendors and applications will > still have a role as long as word processors don't go away), then at > least for copy editing and document QA. > > While in comparison to, say, DITA (which serves the needs of a > different sort of document production), the uptake of the NLM JATS > ("Journal Article Tag Set") will be slow, there's also no reason to > think it won't also be steady and, eventually, strong.
Not if I have anything to do with it :-) That is, I would much rather define a STM vocabulary set for DITA that includes OOTB to-NLM transforms than encourage any of my clients to author in NLM directly. Just saying. Cheers, E. -- Eliot Kimber Senior Solutions Architect "Bringing Strategy, Content, and Technology Together" Main: 512.554.9368 www.reallysi.com www.rsuitecms.com _______________________________________________ oXygen-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.oxygenxml.com/mailman/listinfo/oxygen-user
