The already mentioned XML based CCMS "Calenco XML CMS" still available (see also my post "Open Source CCMS").
There is one more system which lately offers an already existing DITA based CCMS without any license cost: "SiberSafe DITA CMS". Read the EULA carefully but in case you need something to play with....
Both are no more open source. Their goal is not to get an open and shared development. They simple heading for lowering the barrier for customer entry.
What you see is that both cases are the company driving the implementation want to get in tough with you and both companies offers additional features with dedicated license costs.
I personal expect more product in this domain following the same approach. Why?
The specific domain of "technical documentation" is pretty small and there are many different and small companies out there which providing specific products to support this domain.
Even in huge installations the amount of licenses required to support the users dealing with technical information isn't very huge - this means the opportunity to sell a huge amount of licenses is limited. In addition most of the available tools are similar to each other - with individual advantages but with no structural differences.
This means this business model does not really scale and the amount required to sale the license is high.
On the other hand having a tool does not improves your information process and therefore does not add any business value to your organization. At the best case it supports your process with automated tasks. But first of all you need a optimized methods and processes (information process) at all before any tool can assist you as best as possible.
This means - the future is not to create and develop products looks like the today's CCMS system available on the market. The future is to create either information process driven productions where technical information is just one use-case OR focus on integration services to get the value out of existing information.
What are the limitations of todays CCMS system. And how more future oriented designs will look like? More to come in future blog posts....
Showing posts with label dita. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dita. Show all posts
Sunday, May 06, 2012
Monday, November 01, 2010
DITA - Beyond OT
DITA-OT (Open Toolkit) is the reference implementation to transform DITA source into various output formats. The reference implementation is open source and maintained by increasing community:
The OT using Apache ANT as pipeline infrastructure. Thats OK in general, but there are several shortcomings once you have to integrate or extend the OT implementation for enterprise use cases (see e.g. discussion "Pipeline refactoring", "Diving Into Performance Improvements").
Because DITA-OT is "only" a reference implementation there might be other implementation out there already using a better approach because they started development once the limitation of the OT implementation already known?
Yes there are two available I'm aware of with different key aspects:
The OT using Apache ANT as pipeline infrastructure. Thats OK in general, but there are several shortcomings once you have to integrate or extend the OT implementation for enterprise use cases (see e.g. discussion "Pipeline refactoring", "Diving Into Performance Improvements").
Because DITA-OT is "only" a reference implementation there might be other implementation out there already using a better approach because they started development once the limitation of the OT implementation already known?
Yes there are two available I'm aware of with different key aspects:
- XMLmind DITA Converter (see http://www.xmlmind.com/ditac/what_is_ditac.html)
Key Aspects: Easier use, integration and improved output.
Reality: Bad and monolithic design with hard coded java based pipeline and a small user community. No real advantage compared to existing DITA-OT.
- DITA XProc Pipelines (see https://community.emc.com/docs/DOC-8740)
Key Aspects: greater flexibility, extensibility, portability, performance.
Reality:
Implementation based on XProc (XML Pipeline Language). The design is one step in the right direction and shows the much higher scalability (functional and non functional) of this design, e.g. in case you want to use a extended semantics for validation you can add ISO-Schematron based rules for validation using existing "ISO Schematron schema for DITA" stylesheet and build-in "p:validate-with-schematron" step in XProc and add it into the existing pipeline.
This implementation isn't perfect, it mainly use XProc markup for the implementation which makes the code long and hard to read / maintain. The usage of the right language for each step which is one advantage of XML pipelining isn't consequent implemented in this implementation. Based on currently available XProc Engines (http://tests.xproc.org/results/) this implementation is not yet ready for enterprise but this will change in the near future the more real world examples are available and used in production.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
The end of documents....
Assumption
If you have to describe any technical subject you are aware that knowledge is hard to express in a straight linear sequence of information topics. In most cases you have to structure the information into information tropics and semantic connection between those => a network of information topics.
Nothing new and a trivial statement, you might say. All semantic concepts are using those principle buildup.
Yes, but why most technical subjects are still using documents or slide shows to express technical subjects?
Those media formats are linear by design. The reader has to follow the one and only linear flow defined by the author of the document. In the best case the author is able to find one of the sufficient linear paths through the network of information and the reader is therefore able to understand the described subject. But even in this case getting the hole picture, identify ways to extend the provided information, embed it to different subject etc. isn't possible or at least requires to re-construct the information tree in mind.
Ask yourself why you are using
Alternatives?
I'm pretty sure that in the future documents will be replaced with applications which providing a way to describe topics as short topics and makes it easy to connect those topics with semantic links (e.g. depends on, contains, .....). A document in this scenario is just one path through the network of information for one particular use case. This kind of application can replace todays word processing software without loosing any important feature.
In the domain of technical writing topic based authoring (e.g. using DITA information architecture) becomes more and more popular. The main use case there is to (re-)use information as much as possible to reduce creation and information maintenance costs. In my point of view that is "only" a important side effect of having the content defined in a much more usable form. Not a linear sequence of information reflecting a group of authors view but as more or less complete set of information topics linked together. The todays results are still linear documents of some format (pdf, online help formats, ....) but that only corroborate the belief that linear documents are mainstream.
Open Issue
The usability of topic based authoring isn't sufficient today. It is more or less a hand crafted creation of enriched information. To dive into the mainstream usability is the most important factor. The creation and linking of information must be at least as easy as using e.g. Mind Mapping tools (e.g. FreeMind, MindManager) combined with easy to use structured topic content editor (e.g. tools like Xopus or XMAX goes into this direction).
There’s more to come? Lets see....
If you have to describe any technical subject you are aware that knowledge is hard to express in a straight linear sequence of information topics. In most cases you have to structure the information into information tropics and semantic connection between those => a network of information topics.
Nothing new and a trivial statement, you might say. All semantic concepts are using those principle buildup.
Yes, but why most technical subjects are still using documents or slide shows to express technical subjects?
Those media formats are linear by design. The reader has to follow the one and only linear flow defined by the author of the document. In the best case the author is able to find one of the sufficient linear paths through the network of information and the reader is therefore able to understand the described subject. But even in this case getting the hole picture, identify ways to extend the provided information, embed it to different subject etc. isn't possible or at least requires to re-construct the information tree in mind.
Ask yourself why you are using
- A word processing software to define project information (requirements, design specification, test specification, ....)
- Power Point to introduce a particular problem domain
- A word processing software to trace a result of a workshop (also known as workshop protocol)
- ....
Alternatives?
I'm pretty sure that in the future documents will be replaced with applications which providing a way to describe topics as short topics and makes it easy to connect those topics with semantic links (e.g. depends on, contains, .....). A document in this scenario is just one path through the network of information for one particular use case. This kind of application can replace todays word processing software without loosing any important feature.
In the domain of technical writing topic based authoring (e.g. using DITA information architecture) becomes more and more popular. The main use case there is to (re-)use information as much as possible to reduce creation and information maintenance costs. In my point of view that is "only" a important side effect of having the content defined in a much more usable form. Not a linear sequence of information reflecting a group of authors view but as more or less complete set of information topics linked together. The todays results are still linear documents of some format (pdf, online help formats, ....) but that only corroborate the belief that linear documents are mainstream.
Open Issue
The usability of topic based authoring isn't sufficient today. It is more or less a hand crafted creation of enriched information. To dive into the mainstream usability is the most important factor. The creation and linking of information must be at least as easy as using e.g. Mind Mapping tools (e.g. FreeMind, MindManager) combined with easy to use structured topic content editor (e.g. tools like Xopus or XMAX goes into this direction).
There’s more to come? Lets see....
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Open Source CCMS
stumbled upon "Calenco XML CMS" a open source (AGPL) CCMS (for further infos about the different kind of available CMS domains, see my post: http://trent-intovalue.blogspot.com/2010/03/stumbled-upon-microsoft-sharepoint-cms.html).
From the list of features published on their website it looks promising. It seems to me the first CCMS application available as open source. I not verified the application so far but I definitely will. Basic features of course but in case such a application get a strong user and developer community the business case for the small CCMS vendors might be tricky. Will see...
The now implemented support for DITA 1.1 and Docbook 4 and 5. The amount of covered feature is also a matter for the verification.
From the list of features published on their website it looks promising. It seems to me the first CCMS application available as open source. I not verified the application so far but I definitely will. Basic features of course but in case such a application get a strong user and developer community the business case for the small CCMS vendors might be tricky. Will see...
The now implemented support for DITA 1.1 and Docbook 4 and 5. The amount of covered feature is also a matter for the verification.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
DITA DTD: tools to support specialization
if you are new to DITA and want to create a custom DTD configuration with or without custom specialization this tool is a good starting point.
you may ask why, at least if you do not want to introduce custom semantic to your data model you should at least define which domain belongs to you. a summary why to go this way, read http://drmacros-xml-rants.blogspot.com/2007/04/dita-standard-practice-always-make.html.
Online version of "DITA DTD Generator" is available as online version. source code can be found here: http://code.google.com/p/dita-generator/.
If you have to support custom semantic (which is common in enterprise usage of DITA) you might use "DITA Visual Specialization Manager" or read "DITA Specialization Tutorial".
As always using the right tool is only the baseline. The more advanced task is to identify what you need based on your business case.
you may ask why, at least if you do not want to introduce custom semantic to your data model you should at least define which domain belongs to you. a summary why to go this way, read http://drmacros-xml-rants.blogspot.com/2007/04/dita-standard-practice-always-make.html.
Online version of "DITA DTD Generator" is available as online version. source code can be found here: http://code.google.com/p/dita-generator/.
If you have to support custom semantic (which is common in enterprise usage of DITA) you might use "DITA Visual Specialization Manager" or read "DITA Specialization Tutorial".
As always using the right tool is only the baseline. The more advanced task is to identify what you need based on your business case.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
model a DITA compliant model
DITA today is more and more adopted at least in the techdoc domain. the success and adoption rate is based on two major advantages over other existing standards:
since i started working with DITA i reviewed several data models from coworkers, from customers and last but not least created by myself. All of them claimed to be DITA compliant.
Using them with also DITA complaint tools often fails for certain features or in some cases completely.
reason
the first reason still not resolved.
you might argue, why not use the DITA model out of the box?
I'm not yet verified it to see to until which extend this tool supports the modeling / validation process and how much manual work is still involved and how complete the implementation currently is. because this tool is still beta and is brand new i expect much outstanding work but i hope this tool opens the door for speed up DITA related development work and the more important part of the story improve quality for DITA related information models.
i know that the amount of money / amount of customer can be found in this domain is pretty small and the complexity of the problem isn't small enough therefore i do not expect too much competitors in near future, but i might be wrong.
time will show....
- adaptability
the DITA data model can be adapted based on defined rules to specific needs and domains. this concept is called specialization - modularization
content creation is not based on document paradigm but on module paradigm. authors no more create documents they create topics which represent some artifact of the system they describe.
since i started working with DITA i reviewed several data models from coworkers, from customers and last but not least created by myself. All of them claimed to be DITA compliant.
Using them with also DITA complaint tools often fails for certain features or in some cases completely.
reason
- the created models wasn't valid according to the released specification
creating a complaint DITA model (DTD or W3C Schema) requires to know all rules and requirements the DITA specification provides without having any tool support goes beyond the support of creating regular DTD's and W3C Schema's. this means the information architect is leaving alone with the underlying complexity.
i do not know exactly but based on data models i'm faced with i expect that at least 50% of customized DITA models out there are not complaint to the DITA spec.
few years ago i already posted this here: http://dita.xml.org/how-verify-certain-datamodel-dita-complaint - the used tools requires additional, tools specific configuration or semantic or simple doesn't implement a feature according to the specification
the first reason still not resolved.
you might argue, why not use the DITA model out of the box?
- if you have specific requirements in your business process and you require additional semantic to support those
- if you have to simplify the usage of content creation for the authors and users to get better and more consistent content outcome.
note: i consider DITA subsetting / configuration as just another way for the generic concept specialization - if you introduce new business domain / taxonomy into your content maintenance strategy.
- interoperability is no more guaranteed
this is mainly a problem for the enterprise and in most cases not at the beginning of the usage of DITA
but if you once look into this problem you forced to fix all content created against your model or adopt the processing chain your content is delivered to - process chain does not work
you add new tools to your environment and certain features doesn't work. you again can fix all your existing content and the data model and tools or adopt the tool with certain workarounds
I'm not yet verified it to see to until which extend this tool supports the modeling / validation process and how much manual work is still involved and how complete the implementation currently is. because this tool is still beta and is brand new i expect much outstanding work but i hope this tool opens the door for speed up DITA related development work and the more important part of the story improve quality for DITA related information models.
i know that the amount of money / amount of customer can be found in this domain is pretty small and the complexity of the problem isn't small enough therefore i do not expect too much competitors in near future, but i might be wrong.
time will show....
Sunday, February 08, 2009
Generate DITA Java API reference documentation using DITADoclet and DITA API specialization
one example to show a step to close the gap between developers who creating the artifacts and outgoing and enriched documentation created from their source without the need of additional redundancy.
it is not too far away from approach introduced by javadoc / doxygen beside the datamodel used behind this approach has much more value for additional information integration as provided by the classical approach.
not all yet done by the "out-of-the box" solution provided here: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-DITAdoclet/
but you can imagine the possibilities using this kind of approach:
it is not too far away from approach introduced by javadoc / doxygen beside the datamodel used behind this approach has much more value for additional information integration as provided by the classical approach.
not all yet done by the "out-of-the box" solution provided here: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-DITAdoclet/
but you can imagine the possibilities using this kind of approach:
- integration of additional information provided by marketing or tech-doc groups or service groups without any media break in information usage
- usage of other deployment processes for api documentation available within companies infrastructure
- .....
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
RIA for information deployment
during the last couple of years the requirements to (software) applications changing in many ways:
this in particular means that the information must designed to provide
if we look into the information deployment process (other part of information lifecycle is part of subsequent blog posts) one of the most interesting answers to this question is the usage of RIA frameworks for that purpose.
most promising application looking at information deployment is "Adobe AIR".
why:
next step would be to define a gap analysis which features is missing in Adobe AIR and which buisness goal is therefore not fulfilled based on current available platform. i will do this during the next few weeks...see what the results are.
- from application to solution
=> customer is able to configure a solution based on provided services and corresponding orchestration and configuration - from static deployment to dynamic deployment
=>customer is able to update a bought component via online connection. new solution feature can be added, configuration can be changed based on demand. - from function oriented usage to process oriented usage
=>the application functions are embedded in business tasks reflecting the business process of different user group. different user groups therefore faced with different application behavior.
this in particular means that the information must designed to provide
- size on demand
each information product can be configured to fit one particular product installation. product configuration can change over time - update on demand
information updates can be provided as fast as possible using "online channels". on the other hand content must be available without any "online channel" available. - workflow related content mapping
information must not only map to a particular function of the product as already done with e.g. context sensitive onine helps. the information must be mapped and aligned with the workflow / buisness process the production customer intent to use the product
if we look into the information deployment process (other part of information lifecycle is part of subsequent blog posts) one of the most interesting answers to this question is the usage of RIA frameworks for that purpose.
most promising application looking at information deployment is "Adobe AIR".
why:
- most of the required features are part of the design focus or already implemented
- Adobe has selected information products in mind (using RoboHelp for creating online help for Air).
- DITA user community start development of a corresponding plugin to create Adobe AIR help from content created using DITA architecture. (see http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/dita-users/message/12821
next step would be to define a gap analysis which features is missing in Adobe AIR and which buisness goal is therefore not fulfilled based on current available platform. i will do this during the next few weeks...see what the results are.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
just using xml provides Interoperability?
"The Anatomy of Interoperability" is one of the best articles summarize the issue of well know and often promised term "interoperability".
one domain often faced with this term is the world of xml and related "standards". lot's of them out there, some of them really stable and useful and even are interoperable (e.g. xml 1.0, xslt 1.0, xpath 1.0) itself.
by the way just using xml does not gurantee interoperablility for your data. this is only available if application behavior is addressed by a related standard. xml related standards try to achive this (e.g. svg) often fail or they are difficult to use because they missing essential features the specific user domain requires and corresponding tool vendors / application provides add them in a tool specific way. or the standard is too complex to implement a 100% complaint application (e.g. xlink).
DITA for example a new OASIS standard / information architecture to maintain mainly techdoc related features more and more faces with those issues. this standard has customization in mind, means specialization to specific needs is part of the design but there are of course still limitation and there a good reasons for those limitations in general.
the initial standard was not feature complete (means essential requirements were missed in user point of view) and therefore vendors /consultants / end user adding specific non complaint features for their specific needs which often results in missing the goal of interoperability.
why is DITA still successful?
to understand this you have two things to consider:
and that is the key feature if you think about organization specific information models.
one domain often faced with this term is the world of xml and related "standards". lot's of them out there, some of them really stable and useful and even are interoperable (e.g. xml 1.0, xslt 1.0, xpath 1.0) itself.
by the way just using xml does not gurantee interoperablility for your data. this is only available if application behavior is addressed by a related standard. xml related standards try to achive this (e.g. svg) often fail or they are difficult to use because they missing essential features the specific user domain requires and corresponding tool vendors / application provides add them in a tool specific way. or the standard is too complex to implement a 100% complaint application (e.g. xlink).
DITA for example a new OASIS standard / information architecture to maintain mainly techdoc related features more and more faces with those issues. this standard has customization in mind, means specialization to specific needs is part of the design but there are of course still limitation and there a good reasons for those limitations in general.
the initial standard was not feature complete (means essential requirements were missed in user point of view) and therefore vendors /consultants / end user adding specific non complaint features for their specific needs which often results in missing the goal of interoperability.
why is DITA still successful?
to understand this you have two things to consider:
- keep in mind that just using xml does not solve your interoperability goals without any additional effort
- keep in mind that fully inoperable data is not always what you need. regular business cases often working well with a inoperable subset or predefined transformation on demand.
and that is the key feature if you think about organization specific information models.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
XRX gets more attention
XRX shows that more and more information are represented in xml today. that trend will continue because more and more processes today seen as what they always was: "information driven". more and more traditional "unstructured" formats are now represented in xml and more and more business value can be extracted from those formats (OOXML, Open Document, ....).
on the other hand more and more companies start to creating certain type of information (user documentation, online helps, service information) using more semantic rich information architecture as provided by dita.
that opens up the success for databases with native xml read / maintain and search feature set. they are able to provided additional value to already existing information created without the knowledge of their future use.
good summery of technologies in this area are provided by Kurt Cagle "Analysis 2009: XForms and XML-enabled clients gain traction with XQuery databases"
on the other hand more and more companies start to creating certain type of information (user documentation, online helps, service information) using more semantic rich information architecture as provided by dita.
that opens up the success for databases with native xml read / maintain and search feature set. they are able to provided additional value to already existing information created without the knowledge of their future use.
good summery of technologies in this area are provided by Kurt Cagle "Analysis 2009: XForms and XML-enabled clients gain traction with XQuery databases"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)