DITA Redux
Nearly two and a half years ago, the Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS) officially approved the Darwin Information Typing Architecture Standard 1.0, completing the transition from many years of software development at IBM, reaching back to the mid-1990’s before the introduction of XML.
How has this standard for structured
writing, now at its first point release, become the fastest path to
deliver documentation as XML? And what is the business model driving
IBM’s continued support of the standard, with several employees
providing the expertise to shepherd not only the standard, but its
reference implementation of a free and open-source XML publishing
system, the DITA Open Toolkit?
XML has established itself as the
preferred technology for exchanging data between web applications. Now
it has earned pride of place as a document markup language, its
original purpose. When Tim Berners-Lee’s simple HTML exploded in
popularity in the early 1990’s, XML was devised as “SGML for the web.”
SGML’s flagship document application, DocBook, was converted to XML in
1999.
Originally, IBM designed DITA for online documentation,
which was replacing traditional long-printed user manuals, written in
DocBook or IBM’s proprietary IBMIDDoc. Recently, DocBook has been
losing market share to the simpler DITA.
This can only
accelerate, as DITA 1.1 has introduced a Bookmap specialization of the
DITA Map that supports long books. Bookmap has many metadata elements
for Front Matter (table of contents, figure and tables lists,
dedication, etc.), Content Proper (including new parts and chapters),
and Back Matter (index, glossary, notices, appendices).
A major
automation feature in DITA 1.1 is the alphabetization of structures
like glossaries and indexes into multiple languages. At present, this
is a very costly step for localization projects, which offer the single
largest return on investment in DITA XML technology. Translation can be
done piecemeal as DITA topics are completed, without waiting for the
complete book.
According to Norman Walsh, chair of the OASIS
DocBook technical committee, specialization based on the object
orientation and inheritance properties of DITA architecture was the
greatest single advantage of DITA over DocBook. It is ironic but
perhaps predictable that the major specialization in DITA 1.1 is a
direct competitor for DocBook.
To add to DocBook and Bookmap,
Adobe FrameMaker, a tool for long-form publications, introduced the
DITABook. FrameMaker 8 lets DITA authors access the full power of
FrameMaker’s built-in print publishing system, with tables of contents,
figure and table lists, and indexes, plus pristine output to PDF that
competitive authoring solutions can only achieve with expensive
add-ons. By comparison, the DITA Open Toolkit produces lower-quality
PDFs with relatively inflexible formatting.
Besides support for
DITA, FrameMaker 8 shows that Adobe is serious about maintaining this
21-year-old desktop publishing software, alongside its InDesign
replacement for PageMaker, and its team-based contributor tool InCopy,
which together constitute a powerful automated publishing solution with
XML.
DITA is now the fastest way for an organization to start
delivering digital content as reusable XML content components. Many
large organizations have developed their own DTDs and XSLT transforms
to deliver XML content to websites on demand, personalized and
localized, then assembled using XPath, XQuery, and XInclude techniques.
DITA
now delivers that capability without the long time and considerable
expense of DTD and XSLT development. And its unique conref (content
reference) mechanism not only includes the reused component, it checks
it for validation against the schema—unlike XInclude.
I have
asked several IBM DITA specialists to explain the corporate rationale
behind the sizable investment in personnel needed to maintain and
advance DITA through standards development. Yes, many other companies
are contributing as well, but IBM stands out. Is it just a proud parent
protecting its offspring?
The best reason I have heard is one
that might appeal to top corporate management: A major cost in mergers
and acquisitions is the expense of converting the intellectual property
of the acquired firm—that is to say, all its digital content.
If
all that content is in a content management system based on
single-source DITA XML, changing the corporate branding is as simple as
changing it in all the reusable DITA topics. Then your automated XML
publishing engine churns out a totally assimilated new division of your
corporate empire.