Book Tagging Panel Discussion

and never of Martin J. can Cindy let's open up the questions Cervantes see a show of hands how many people here have used the book DTD wow that's a lot more than I would thought how many of you are going to switch in the short term you think 2 bits off some more hands up year now I hope of getting a subquestion some animal right yeah I this is uh Damien has from Avalon consulting that is really a question that people were going from word to the NLM XML using files on how automated have you found that promises to be and the 2nd question I have you found kind best practices and guidelines give your authors to nature that transformation is as smooth as possible any the 3rd question and is the workflow pre-mission 1 way going from word XML I also going from word from X that 2 word to but no and but I will answer your your last question 1st and and right now no we're not we're not going back to the source documents make changes and that is not a best practice and as far as X. styling goes we have members of our staff were more or less proficient with that and we have 1 and in particular the use of he's our go-to guy for more difficult projects and I have asked the editorial department in the past if if we could go back and just not style documents would you prefer to her to return to the to the good old days and their answers notably now and then they say well in textiles is a lot more work but it's a lot more work up-front that results in a cleaner document you so I'm I guess that's I guess that's a pro X the pitch on my part but am that your 2nd question was a matter Peterson equivalent even remember that 1 was with the automated the each conversion can be also giving any best practices that you can get your guidelines get your authors to nature of work the authors that I the bomb and I'm yeah that is on on the 1 hand the we we have that the guidelines that we provide our others and it's certainly procedures are x styling by by a matter of 4 years or so and then we're still worse so to the same problems and I think that um I think it's been touched on a couple times here that that authoring in book world differs somewhat from offering the journals world and an and but rather seem to have a lot more latitude in terms of what's an acceptable project but yeah I think that it behooves us to this was my organization to give our editors a little more authority and over over a certain aspects of the publishing process and I think that some the the not to disparage my employer but I'm having something we could definitely work on and from my side and then conversion to XML from X houses and I it is is totally automatic in the sense that we don't do any tweets to the XML on the back and come for print and think we do not produce word files back from XML ends do as far as recommendations for authors and 1 of the more technical but and I would say if it's not a table don't make a table and it is but the mechanic table and people yeah and try to do I think is an old word not understanding what the ramifications are down the road so and if you need something to be in a text box please don't put it in a table and if it is a table please don't do with tabs and and if it's an equation if at all possible do it in a format that can at least to be converted to not on red so close to laugh type as you can get it is ideal from and I work for the mn yes he have this funny again and the so the question about that this is out in draft form and I guess can wonder how late in the game is it how is it alpha stage drafter beta how much and how much might it change and

especially after seeing Windows Presentation seems like us a yes it seemed obvious but there some each work should be done to a bits and and other resources that are already at community can want this chair the Working Group you want take on the I'm well it's it's 0 . 2 now so we have 8 points until into 1 I I know that's not a good answer I think that we're going to have to see what the users over the next few months and what kind of what kind of content we have comments we get on on the Jets list of I really the you know how I can say with a travel beta online when the when the Working Group met in person just afterward during the hurricane well we thought we had things nail down pretty good had we so OK we're going to put these things into of an extension of jets 1 . 0 1 1 . 0 becomes final and so 1 point 0 became file I said OK let's make bits and roll out the door in 2 weeks and the working group said 0 wait a minute we have some things talk about how we got again we talked to talk together and in 2 or 3 conference calls and this some things over the e-mail until we came up with this with this stress so I'm I'm sure there are still some things to work out and but I'm not sure when we're going to just to 1 . 0 problem after 2 . 4 we declare on the if I and I speak as a member of the working group but sort of unofficially my own personal impressions the 1st is on what we don't have any firm timeline income say saying that because we really wanna work based on feedback

and if we look back on the history of jets really the NLM DTD we really didn't have a set timeline until we started to get the things like 2 . 2 and 2 . 3 because began to see what usage was so I think part of it right now

depends on what the usage in what the feedback in the I'm really just stick

my neck out with this next comment by saying that our as a member of the working group is more of a personal comments I would tend to guide the Working Group Towards keeping any updates between now and 1 point out to the greatest extent possible 100 % backwards compatible with 0 . 2 and so people who adopted early on suddenly stopped because 1 . 0 isn't are backwards compatible on I know we even with jets we've had discussions at what point we feel comfortable breaking batted backwards compatibility and I think that's important to encourage people to work with it it is not a I don't think we stated this explicitly it is not backwards compatible with the current 3 . 0 but ETD art so you will have to make changes if you are used to using that on and if you got a microphone on site you quite enough of them call the I think I want Ruthie that were I think we're gonna do everything we can to keep 1 . 0 4 0 point 3 point 4 . 5 whatever the backward compatible with 0 . 2 1 2 for the fisheries and use so the likely changes as we move forward in the draft would either be adding new elements or offer the green ification of what should already be fairly green Jedi Tommy of something else to to more directly address alone questions comment which is commenting on the issues that Wendell raised there is the possibility of dramatic change the suggestion that this book's model would be more useful to the world if it was a more DocBook alike or more like or more TI like vanish jets like is a really interesting suggestion on and something that perhaps the Working Group on the community might wanna consider but it does run contrary to 1 of the things that the Working Group of flat out agreed on initially which was that the it was going to be as jets like as possible and in particular it was going to take a minimal work to take Ajax journal article and turn it into a chapter in a book and we wanted the minimal number of changes to that and it is not possible to both right a tag set in which you can take an existing jazz journal article and make it a chapter in a book without having to do much if any work to it and you have a Texas set in which you

can take a TI document

and blue make it a chapter in a book or if I cooked a day that I've book document and make it a chapter in that same book and not to mention I'm not even sure what it means to take a did a document all did at all

file set and turn it into a chapter in the book and so I think over Wendell is raise a really interesting question particularly with people saying wait a minute we don't wanna make major changes it's probably off the table at this time thank the yeah I I I would like to take everything automata said and underline it on this changes made a very important point and I think it would be a big mistake if you took away from my presentation the not that I think would be a good idea for a i jabs were it to become TEI like that is not at all the idea here but on the contrary I think the world was better reserved if jesters but just as well uh and bits does work but just as well about TI's 2 in which he I'd as well right in the and in respect of this I think about know Christians harmonization which I think is actually really nice because but the point of a mapping exercise would not be to obliterate the distinctions or to make it so it didn't matter whether you to which which which direction you chose right I mean if that's something that happens because it turns out that the that the differences between the 2 communities are only on a cultural level had no revocations on the technical side of the now be fine but I don't think it's very likely and I actually think that the cultural differences go hand in hand with the technical differences and what we need to do is the mapping it exposes and under you know where the where you actually have benefits from choosing to be on 1 side of a lot of boundary line a versus another so that you know it into the hobby for me to say that that mean my measured by the authors say that it should that prove that should not be TI like I'm in fact I think that 1 of the things specifically the point scoping and many other question beverage able adding letter taking into bullets I think that we mistake personal and bits is going to do much better fit tries to start a level much watch you know generic and they're not trying to address reading at the level of the elements semantics in the same way as the tries to do and simple and end users other strategies were well known within that markup community for for modeling semantic data in other ways so that can manage coping without having to go through this you know periodic shedding of new element types that everybody has to adjust adopt learn how they work on does not necessarily the best but at all even if it is that has worked very well for TI and so what I'd like to see is a conversation about these things you know and you know which opposing with these issues are all in line with the with the reason because of that but got a much better which is the you know the finds it spits nests rather the drastic sum therefore the OK great thank you on I suspect there were questions out there but I'm conscious of the fact that we take in 5 minutes to the break and we wanna keep the 330 session on time so thank you very much to of the panelists thank you have questions I will be here during the break if you want come down the