Contact: Rod Siberine FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tel: (908) 251-6084
Fax: (908) 754-7555
Email: rsiberine@sdicorp.com
Contact: Rod Siberine FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tel: (908) 251-6084
Fax: (908) 754-7555
Email: rsiberine@sdicorp.com
Hello all,
I am preparing a half-day seminar on DITA for documentation managers and I want to stay away from all the technical details - as that will definitely scare them off. Instead, I need to talk business to them. I can invent business cases or find them through documentation companies I work with, but I would like to find statistics on what is spent on documentation and translation by large companies, just to give a background of the potential return on investment that we are talking about.
This article got published on developerWorks last month:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-DITAdoclet/
This should be of interest to anyone who has generated Javadoc in the past but wished they could get a more semantic, reprocessable format output instead. The doclet produces content using the DITA API specialization, which can be processed with the DITA Open Toolkit. Note that it includes the actual doclet code in the resources section, so you can try this yourself at home.
Some of the definitions in a definition-list have clearly-defined attributions, for example ISO. It seems logical, if the goal is to produced a set of structured and searchable files, to use something like
[dlentry]
[dt]name of term goes here[/dt]
[dd]definition of term goes here
[source]attribution goes here[/source]
[/dd]
[/dlentry]
[source] is clearly not the element to use here, though; nor is [author].
Any suggestions?