Back to SGML (ugh) after yrs of XML - AF TOs - State of the Zoo Qs

[RobertWilliams]

[CROSS POST - Put this up through Tech Writer - Should be here maybe ]

I know that there are some real experts out there that read this list that are SGML & XML and Arbortext gurus… with this I beseech you… (burning chicken bones over a bat wing fire here)

-1. New TMs for new USAF equipment calling for SGML vice XML…. what’s up with that? (i.e. where are they going with this, big USAF I mean?) Too much $$$ in SGML infrastructure? Thought they’d be moving forward to XML on all fronts, no? The end product appears to be ‘indexed’ PDFs with SGML file deliverables.

a. Deliveries are both SGML and ‘indexed’ PDFs (meaning ‘linked’? More on this below)

b. SOW says we can use any SGML editor with their DTD (true), but they also state their FOSIs were built for Datalogic only (which I’ve never used.)

c. Now I need to buy freakin’ ‘Datalogics’?@!? I know nothing of ‘Datalogics.’ (and I’m already old enough to remember using Interleaf)

a. No screen FOSI (have worked without one a lot – so not too concerned – mebbe pay Jerry Tippee to dummy us up a basic screen FOSI for the DTD)

b. What is the likelihood that I can get a decent PDF out of this without too much wailing and gnashing of teeth? (Arbortext’s PrintComposer?)

c. What is the likelihood that the PDF will come out with the links working properly? (not holding my breath on this one)

d. Or will I need to buy some Datalogics product to process my Arbortext edited SGML into a decent (delivery quality) PDF?

-Thanks in advance for all reads and replies.

Bob W.,

EMAIL Robert.Williams@TechResearchGroup.Com

[lfraley]

Hi Bob,

We've had many, many inquiries just like this. I got a look at the print
FOSI and, IIRC, it showed intensive use of Datalogics extensions which
means Print Composer won't give you the PDF you want without a whole lot of
work. The Authoring/Editing in Arbortext works fine (and yes, there's no
screen fosi, but, unlike the print fosi, this is pretty simple to fix -
PTC, us, Terra, GPSL, Oberon, Suzanne, or any of the Arbortext partners can
do that for you, or you can do it yourself with Styler + eLearning).

Cheers,
Liz

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Bob Williams <
robert.williams@techresearchgroup.com> wrote:

> b. SOW says we can use any SGML editor with their DTD (true), but they
> also state their FOSIs were built for Datalogic only (which I’ve never
> used.)
>
> c. Now I need to buy freakin’ ‘Datalogics’?@!? I know nothing of
> ‘Datalogics.’ (and I’m already old enough to remember using Interleaf)
>
> 3. Using Arbortext for SGML - will it play nice in the sandbox with this
> stuff? (Specifically:)
>
> a. No screen FOSI (have worked without one a lot – so not too concerned –
> mebbe pay Jerry Tippee to dummy us up a basic screen FOSI for the DTD)
>
> b. What is the likelihood that I can get a decent PDF out of this without
> too much wailing and gnashing of teeth? (Arbortext’s PrintComposer?)
>

[ptc-953343]

At 08:19 AM 6/21/2013, Bob Williams wrote:

>[CROSS POST - Put this up through Tech Writer - Should be here maybe ]
>
>- Hi all, long time lurker, long time tech
>writer
mostly military TMs (SGML & XML – Arbortext and some structured Frame).
>
>- I know that there are some real experts out
>there that read this list that are SGML & XML
>and Arbortext gurus
with this I beseech you

>(burning chicken bones over a bat wing fire here)
>
>- After several yrs of 40051 Army XML TMs (LOGSA
>– Arbortext – PrintComposer - PDF Output)
I’m
>being dragged back into SGML, for some USAF TOs.
>
>
>
>Questions are:
>
>1. New TMs for new USAF equipment calling for
>SGML vice XML
. what’s up with that? (i.e.
>where are they going with this, big USAF I
>mean?) Too much $$$ in SGML infrastructure?
>Thought they’d be moving forward to XML on all
>fronts, no? The end product appears to be
>‘indexed’ PDFs with SGML file deliverables.

I'd check to see if they just didn't pick up some boilerplate text


>2. I’ve always used GFE/GFI provided DTDs for
>both SGML and XML, and while this appears to be
>the case here, there are a couple of ‘peculiarities’ lurking

>
> a. Deliveries are both SGML and ‘indexed’
> PDFs (meaning ‘linked’? More on this below)

Indexed I believe is Full text indexed for search
capabilities. If you have the full Acrobat there
is an option to do this after producing a PDF file.


> b. SOW says we can use any SGML editor with
> their DTD (true), but they also state their
> FOSIs were built for Datalogic only (which I’ve never used.)
>
> c. Now I need to buy freakin’
> ‘Datalogics’?@!? I know nothing of
> ‘Datalogics.’ (and I’m already old enough to remember using Interleaf)


To use the DL FOSI yes. There are extensions and
differences between Arbortext and DL implementations of the FOSI spec.


>3. Using Arbortext for SGML - will it play
>nice in the sandbox with this stuff? (Specifically
>
> a. No screen FOSI (have worked without one a
> lot – so not too concerned – mebbe pay Jerry
> Tippee to dummy us up a basic screen FOSI for the DTD)

Do you have styler? You might be able to do a
quick import and get something useful. Even with
an Arbortext FOSI, they didn't implement a very
good import function, so don't expect much. The
DL aspect throws more wrenches into the works.



> b. What is the likelihood that I can get a
> decent PDF out of this without too much wailing
> and gnashing of teeth? (Arbortext’s PrintComposer?)


None, need a FOSI that will work and they will
probably expect something that is as good/complete as their DL FOSI.


> c. What is the likelihood that the PDF will
> come out with the links working properly? (not holding my breath on this one)

From DL I would say it is good


> d. Or will I need to buy some Datalogics
> product to process my Arbortext edited SGML
> into a decent (delivery quality) PDF?

Could be the easier way to go. If you make your
own FOSI you will have to make it robust enough.
With this being GFE, and using DL, you should be
able to push back and say it is a good as "your"
FOSI produces. If you start writing your own
processing, then you are going to have to deal
with many style requests in which you cannot
compare your results to the existing capabilities.


>- All thoughts and insights welcome. Let me know what y’all think.
>
>- Thanks in advance for all reads and replies.
>
>
>
>Bob W., Bristol RI, US
>
>
>EMAIL
><Robert.Williams@TechResearchGroup.Com">mailto:Robert.Williams@TechResearchGroup.Com>Robert.Williams@TechResearchGroup.Com
>
>
>
>Site Links:
><View">http://portal.ptcuser.org/p/fo/st/post=118316&anc=p118316#p118316>View
>post
>online
><View">http://portal.ptcuser.org/p/fo/si/topic=21>View
>mailing list
>online <Send">mailto:->Send
>new post via
>email
><Unsubscribe">mailto:-?Subject=Unsubscribe>Unsubscribe
>from this mailing
>list

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Danny Vint

Panoramic Photography

[ptc-1908075]

Hi Bob!

First of all, this is possible. Others are doing it. In past months, I have talked to folks at three other companies who are in similar situations with the AF.

First of all, the Datalogics FOSI will not even load in Arbortext. You will definitely need an authoring FOSI. Re: print FOSI, be aware that DL Composer costs $50K plus several thousand in maintenance, and apparently there is no guarantee that the provided FOSI will work. The first group I talked to bought DL Composer, but later they bought my Screen and Print FOSI tutorials, so I assume they developed a print FOSI for Arbortext Print Composer. I never heard back from the second group, but I am working with the third group to develop a print FOSI for Print Composer because they don't have the budget for a Datalogics license. They have already made their first delivery of 35% of the documentation.

Also, when I was at Arbortext, I developed the forerunner of Arbortext's Change Page for Defense application because a major DL Composer user was unable to publish due to DL Composer software defects that never got fixed. However, I thinkChange Page for Defense costsmore than DL Composer. You'll have to ask others about how well it works.

If you do not currently have the budget for this, you can postpone some of the cost by deferring support for change processing until later -- it is not needed for the first issue of the manual. But you'll have to face it eventually, and it is a non-trivial task.

I'd like to offer you my services in any way I can help. My first question would be which DTD? 34784? 87929?

Clear as mud? Please let me know any questions you may have.

Good luck!

Suzanne Napoleon
www.FOSIexpert.com
"WYSIWYG is last-century technology!"

[RobertWilliams]

First, thanks for the replies. We've obviously still got a few unanswered Qs to go here.

Appreciate the insights - we'll probably look over a few options and decide whether to either

(a) Punt - It's a small 4 TO TM project - questionable whether it'd be worth the aggravation, or

(b) Pass - along the cost to the prime and sub-out the FOSI problem, or

(c) Kick - The gov't USAF TO gov't folks to either run the PDFs themselves, or drop the PDF rqmnt

Regards and thanks for the quick replies, Bob W. Bristol RI