Re: SGML

[Linda Moore <lmoore -at- ONRAMP -dot- NET>]

One additional note to Mark Levinson's comments.  The Document Designer or
DTD writer is a separate position from any of the document creation
functions.  This is necessary in order to maintain document control,
document integration and consistency.

Linda


>Mark Levinson (mark -at- sd -dot- co -dot- il) wrote:
>: Any feelings on SGML?  Advantages, disadvantages?

>: ** Disadvantages:  It takes away your control over how the
>:       text looks and how the text fits on the page.  It demands
>:       that you consider content without considering form, the
>:       message without the medium.

>No. It demands that you consider content _separately_ from form.
>Someone (the document designer) must make decisions up front about how
>the document is to be laid out and presented.  Once these decisions
>are made, you are _guaranteed_ consistency.  Such consistency means
>higher quality documents and less work for your editor.

>That's not to say that these decisions are cast in concrete --
>your document designer needs to be flexible enough to implement
>changes when they are necessary.

>:       It can lead to unrealistic expectations of portability
>:       (wow, we can use our brochure as the introduction to
>:       our reference manual, our reference manual as our
>:       training manual, our training manual as our online help...).

>Maybe. I guess you are saying that people start to expect that the
>same information can do triple duty without rewriting. That's not
>SGML's fault -- you can make the same bad assumptions with FrameMaker
>or Word. Remember cut and paste?

>:       And my specific pet peeve:  If the importance of your
>:       headings is not really in strict top-down order, there's
>:       no way you can let the reader know.

>:       (That may bear explanation.  Suppose, for example, that
>:       I am explaining functions one by one and that for convenience
>:       the functions are grouped by category.  Maybe the category is a
>:       second-level heading and the function name is a third-level heading
>:       but I want the function name to jump out at the reader; that's
>:       what the reader is more likely to be looking for.  I can't
>:       convey the idea that a third-level heading should be more
>:       prominent than a second-level heading.)

>Sounds to me like your document analyst and/or designer did a lousy job.
>If you have a manual section that describes functions one by one,
>then whoever wrote your DTD should have taken that into account.
>And you should be talking to whoever decided not to emphasize the
>function name. These things are not cast in stone unless you have
>an inflexible document designer.

>:    Advantages:  It's sexy.

>Actually, it's really not. SGML as a "language" (many people will argue
>that it is not a language, and they have valid points) is pretty clunky.

>: __________________________________________________________________________
>: ||- Mark L. Levinson, mark -at- sd -dot- co -dot- il -- Box 5780, 46157 Herzlia, Israel -||
>: ||     You can't judge right by looking at the wrong. - Willie Dixon    ||

>I think this .sig is particularly apt. It appears that you are looking
>at an SGML implementation that was not particularly well thought-out,
>and therefore are making judgements based on a bad example.
>I don't mean to be overly critical -- I just think that you are
>judging SGML strictly from the point of view of an author who is
>working in an inflexible environment.
>--
>Glenda Jeffrey                                     Email: jeffrey -at- hks -dot- com
>Hibbitt, Karlsson & Sorensen, Inc                  Phone: 401-727-4200
>1080 Main St.                                      Fax:   401-727-4208
>Pawtucket, RI 02860