> In terms of the cost of customization, I have found customizing the
> DocBook 4 DTD to be easier than customizing the DITA DTDs.
Talk about complex transforms: I've been using DITA recently, and the OT
stylesheets look pretty intimidating to me - and no 'DITA XSL The
Complete Guide' to help sort them out!
Bob Stayton wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> My impression is that many groups adopt DITA because they want to work
> in topics rather than chapters. Then they do whatever is needed to use
> DITA to write topics. I have been in contact with more than one group
> that has adopted DITA without any DTD customization. As you say, people
> often do crazy things. 8^)
>
> One common DocBook customization practice is to cut down on the number
> of elements. There are several reasons why:
>
> a. When using an XML editor that presents a list of valid tag names,
> the list can be quite long in many contexts (such as inlines). Many
> such elements are never to be used, so remove them from sight.
>
> b. Reducing ambiguity in choosing among similar elements.
>
> c. Reducing the complexity of a stylesheet customization. If you know
> you are only supporting certain elements you don't need to have
> templates for all elements.
>
> d. Reduce the complexity of the para element by removing block element
> children (making it like simpara).
>
> It is possible to make a subset that still produces documents that
> validate with the full DocBook schema. But of course not the other way
> around.
>
> In terms of the cost of customization, I have found customizing the
> DocBook 4 DTD to be easier than customizing the DITA DTDs. In DITA's
> DTDs, everything is a twice-removed parameter entity, and it is hard to
> keep track of where an element is actually declared and what children it
> can contain. DocBook 4 uses parameter entities, but not to such a
> complex degree. DocBook 5's RelaxNG grammar is even easier to
> customize, once you learn the grammar.
>
> Bob Stayton
> Sagehill Enterprises
> <mailto:>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Eric Johnson <mailto:>
> *To:* DocBook Apps ML <mailto:>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 19, 2009 5:11 AM
> *Subject:* [docbook-apps] DocBook Customization
>
> I was talking to someone last night and they mentioned that the
> biggest use case, and the one that is causing everyone to flock to
> DITA, for using DocBook is to take the schema and then customize it.
>
> My first reaction was to think "That's completely crazy. This person
> is obviously just a DITA cultist and seeing the world through tinted
> lenses." Then the cynic in me piped up and said "People often do
> crazy things."
>
> Is this a big use case in the DocBook world? Do organizations start
> with standard DocBook and then tweak it around to make some
> customized version of the schema that is no longer DocBook?
>
> Why would an organization customize DocBook instead of adopting DITA
> which is built with the (almost) requirement that it be customized?
>
> What is the cost of doing the customization?
> One of the reasons my group adopted DocBook was that the schema did
> not need to be customized. We had to create a few guidelines around
> using certain tags, but that was much easier than modifying the
> schema. Perhaps in larger groups using the schema to enforce rules
> is more desirable.
>
