[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Psgml-devel] Re: Key sequence C-c C-f C-e uses invalid prefix chara
From: |
Robert J. Chassell |
Subject: |
Re: [Psgml-devel] Re: Key sequence C-c C-f C-e uses invalid prefix characters |
Date: |
Fri, 17 Jan 2003 12:42:54 +0000 (UTC) |
... The OP's complaint was -- in effect -- that he couldn't care
less whether the "SGML" he produced was valid or not ...
Here is a possible solution for XML:
* If the person provides a DTD use that ....
* If the person does *not* provide a DTD use the texinfo.dtd
provided in the texinfo-4.3 distribution in makeinfo/texinfo.dtd
* Provide and document a simple command to convert an XML document
using the texinfo.dtd and the texinfo.xsl to Texinfo. (I am
pretty sure a suitable conversion program already exists, but it
needs documentation and maybe packaging in a shell script that
calls the appropriate ancillary files.)
`makeinfo' already provides the option to convert a Texinfo source
file to an XML output file with the texinfo.dtd using the --xml option
There is a major advantage to making the texinfo.dtd the default; with
it, you can convert the source XML (or "deep representation") file to
all the various different output (or "surface representation") formats
that people use.
Here is the argument favoring Texinfo, or a Texinfo-like mark up
language, using DocBook as the prime villain, and LaTeX as a
secondary.
DocBook is a widely used format that has a more complex DTD than
texinfo.dtd. (Incidentally, `makeinfo' provides an option to convert
a Texinfo source to DocBook, but as said here, depending on how the
author writes the document, the reverse may be harder or impossible.)
DocBook suffers two major problems, both fatal, neither technical:
* DocBook documents are generally harder to read (both by novices
and by experts) in their `deep representation' form, before
being converted to formats to which readers listen or view.
This means it is harder to edit the document. Many people who
use interfaces that hide the looks of the document do not
perceive this as a problem because they write for that single
interface or `surface representation'. This leads us to the
second, fatal problem:
* Writers often use DocBook features. Indeed, this is something
you would expect and generally welcome! The features were
designed to be used!
Unfortunately, DocBook was designed for people who are
situationally sighted -- not blind, not driving a car, not
working on something to which they must apply visual attention.
In this sense, DocBook is like LaTeX.
The problem, and this is the key, is that most people who write
DocBook documents fail to write them for a wide range of
readers.
People who write for Texinfo also often fail to consider their
different kinds of readers, but Texinfo discourages `high res
visual presumptions'.
Texinfo does a better job of ensuring that authors write documents
that are readable and listenable by everyone than does the
alternative, which for DocBook or LaTeX is to ask authors to
describe their picture, an action which may take `a thousand
words', in addition to displaying the picture for those who can
view it.
Technically, you can write a document using DocBook or LaTeX that
converts well to widely different output representations, not just
to one output representation. The problem is, enough people
don't.
Every time you write, please write for the following readers:
* the blind person, whether permanently or situationally blind,
who is listening to your work using Emacspeak
* the person reading your document on a Web site, who has a fast
Internet connection
* the person reading your document on a Web site who has a slow
Internet connection to your Web site and who is paying by the
downloaded byte
* the person reading your document efficiently, navigating
around to parts quickly
* the person reading your document on paper that has been
printed by a high resolution printer
* the person working on a slow machine or over a slow
connection, who is reading your work, which is coming to him
or her at less than 300 baud. (And before those of you who
are fortunate say that slowness is obsolete and never occurs
nowadays, please note that that in my experience, slow
connections still occur, even though most of the time, I have
a 40kb/s telephone connection.)
And, yes, as I was typing that last sentence, my Internet
connection vanished, my dialer redialed and a voice said, "If you
would like to make a call, please hang up and try again" ....
Awkward connections occur everywhere.
--
Robert J. Chassell Rattlesnake Enterprises
http://www.rattlesnake.com GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
http://www.teak.cc address@hidden
Re: [Psgml-devel] Re: Key sequence C-c C-f C-e uses invalid prefix characters, Ron Ross, 2003/01/11