[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference vaxuum::online_bookbuilding

Title:Online Bookbuilding
Notice:This conference is write-locked: see note 1.3.
Moderator:VAXUUM::UTT
Created:Fri Aug 12 1988
Last Modified:Mon Jul 15 1991
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:440
Total number of notes:2134

191.0. "Formatting REPORT doctype sources for the Bookreader" by CASEE::CLARK (Ward Clark) Sat Sep 02 1989 09:01

    My project has a number of existing paper documents produced with
    conventional doctypes (e.g., REPORT).

    I'd like to publish these documents in Bookreader format with a minimum
    amount of hassle.  I've read the _Coding Documentation Source Files_
    document and I'm aware of the basic requirements (e.g., required symbol
    names).  Those things aren't a problem.

    The first unanticipated problem that I encountered is that when I use
    the REPORT doctype to format the paper version of a document, DOCUMENT
    is unhappy with a <FIGURE_FILE> tag that mentions a BOOKREADER style
    figure.

    Before I start digging into online book building any further, I'd like
    some estimate of the practicality of maintaining a single set of SDML
    source files for both PostScript and Bookreader publishing.  What I'm
    looking for here are the "gotchas" that aren't in the _Coding_
    document.

    -- Ward
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
191.1CLOSET::UTTTue Sep 05 1989 18:3340
    Ward-
    
    The hardcopy doctypes don't know about the BOOKREADER destination.
    You need to include a symbols file so that your hardcopy processing
    will work: doc$local_formats:cup$online_defs.gdx. It's installed 
    in doc$local_formats when you restore the online saveset. This
    is documented in the first section of _Coding Documentation Source
    Files_. (I'm at home and don't have a copy, so I can't quote chapter
    and verse.)
    
    I've tried to put all the gotchas in this document. As I learn about
    them, I document them (or fix them). Much of what's in that document
    is there because of user feedback, so please don't pull back from
    online bookbuilding because of possible gotchas: we need the input.
    Comments on deficiencies in the document are also welcome.
    
    Estimate of the practicality of maintaining single source files? That
    depends on your document and what you want/need (how important is it to
    generate *both* online and hardcopy -- if all your readers have
    workstations, do you really need hardcopy? and so forth.) I would say
    that if your document consists mainly of very large, very complex
    tables, generating acceptable output for *both* online and hardcopy
    will be difficult. (Other notes in this conference discuss the 
    difficulties that tables present.) On the other hand, the near
    impossibility of maintaining parallel source files for different
    outputs means that it's almost always more practical to maintain
    single source files. All of which boils down to: I dunno, try it
    and see what happens...
    
    One thing to note is that the REPORT doctype is not supported for
    online and you may have some problems with tags that are only
    recognized for that doctype. (I did implement a few of the REPORT
    tags at someone's request a while back so they won't all be
    unrecognized, but you'll find out from the tag translator pretty
    fast...) In that case, you might try conditionalizing the front
    matter, one condition for online and one for hardcopy. 
    
    Good luck,
    
    Mary
191.2Thanks for the encouragementCASEE::CLARKWard ClarkWed Sep 06 1989 14:5839
    .1> You need to include a symbols file so that your hardcopy processing
    .1> will work: doc$local_formats:cup$online_defs.gdx.  ...  This is
    .1> documented in the first section of _Coding Documentation Source Files_.
    .1> (I'm at home and don't have a copy, so I can't quote chapter and
    .1> verse.)

    It's "Known problem #6" on page xi.  I found that by visual scanning;
    the TOC and Index didn't help (hint, hint).

    Unfortunately, several of our documents are already using /SYMBOLS for
    some home-grown tags.  Yeah, I know we can graft the files together. 
    Oh goody, another task for our trusty MMS document building procedures!

    .1> please don't pull back from online bookbuilding because of possible
    .1> gotchas: we need the input.

    That's just the kind of encouragement I was looking for.  Richard-the-
    writer and I will give it a shot.

    .1> how important is it to generate *both* online and hardcopy -- if
    .1> all your readers have workstations, do you really need hardcopy?
    .1> and so forth.

    I know some of our valued MEMEX reviewers don't have workstations.

    My personal feeling is that on-line is great for reference, but for
    beginning-to-end reading/reviewing a paper copy is more friendly,
    especially when I want to make red marks.

    Also, I wouldn't want to curl up in bed with a good workstation.  :-}

    .1> you might try conditionalizing the front matter, one condition for
    .1> online and one for hardcopy.

    I was already thinking of that.

    Watch this space for news of our REPORTing via the Bookreader success.

    -- Ward
191.3REPORTing Bookreader successCASEE::THOMSONRichard ThomsonWed Sep 13 1989 08:5231
    Well, as predicted, doc$local_formats:cup$online_defs.gdx did the
    trick. Nearly. We have a successful build, but the ONLINE.HAND version
    complains:

[ T a g    T r a n s l a t i o n ]...
    %TAG-I-DEFSLOADD, End of Loading of Tag Definitions
    %TAG-I-LCL_MSG01, Using online bookbuilding tools, 2-August-1989 baselevel
    %TAG-W-TAGNOTPRE, at tag <RUNNING_TITLE> on line 174 in file
       DISK_AIM_USER:[THOMSON.MEMEX.DOC_DEV]HYPERVIEW_V1_USER_INTERFACE.SDML;
       Tag <RUNNING_TITLE> invalid unless preceded by TEMPLATE_SECTION_ATTRIBUTES
    %TAG-W-TAGNOTPRE, at tag <RUNNING_FEET> on line 179 in file
       DISK_AIM_USER:[THOMSON.MEMEX.DOC_DEV]HYPERVIEW_V1_USER_INTERFACE.SDML;
       Tag <RUNNING_FEET> invalid unless preceded by TEMPLATE_SECTION_ATTRIBUTES
    %TAG-W-TAGNOTPRE, at tag <RUNNING_FEET> on line 271 in file
       DISK_AIM_USER:[THOMSON.MEMEX.DOC_DEV]HYPERVIEW_V1_USER_INTERFACE.SDML;
       Tag <RUNNING_FEET> invalid unless preceded by TEMPLATE_SECTION_ATTRIBUTES
    %TAG-W-TAGNOTPRE, at tag <RUNNING_FEET> on line 861 in file
       DISK_AIM_USER:[THOMSON.MEMEX.DOC_DEV]HYPERVIEW_V1_USER_INTERFACE.SDML;
       Tag <RUNNING_FEET> invalid unless preceded by TEMPLATE_SECTION_ATTRIBUTES

    [and so on...]

    I cannot find TEMPLATE_SECTION_ATTRIBUTES mentioned anywhere else
    (online or hardcopy), so I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do to fix
    this. The book builds ok, although there are no headers or footers. So
    far, I cannot detect any other problems with the build. Certainly,
    ONLINE-CLEANUP didn't find anything to complain about. Any ideas?

    Regards

    Richard-the-writer     
191.4Hello! Is anybody there? Please?CASEE::THOMSONRichard ThomsonMon Sep 18 1989 04:190
191.5I'll check this out as soon as I can...NAVIGO::GRANTI&#039;ve saved $2119.00 since I quit smoking.Mon Sep 18 1989 09:230