Re: XML and efficiency

["Mark Baker" <listsub -at- analecta -dot- com>]

Lyndsey Amott wrote:

> I have read through the archives and the recommended articles, and I
> understand the basics of how XML works (tags, structure, etc.), but I
don't
> understand why or how XML improves efficiency. I just don't understand the
> advantages of using XML.

Most of what is written about XML suffers from
can't-see-the-forest-for-the-trees syndrome. Put simply, XML allows you to
define tagging languages. Tagging languages allow you to add marks to texts
so that those texts can be processed by computer programs. If adding such
marks to texts allows you to replace human effort with computer processing,
you get a gain in efficiency (providing, of course, that the gain is not
offset by increased setup costs -- a concern with all forms of automation).

There are many different parts of the information development process that
can be usefully automated. These include, but are not limited to:

* Formatting of texts for publication
* Creation of different output media
* Assembly of documents from information components
* Validation of input text
* Systematic collection and verification of data
* Management and integration of review cycles
* Implementation of effectivity (differing texts for different items in a
product line)
* Indexing and retrieval of texts
* Generation of custom texts for specific tasks and or audiences
* Maintaining the normalization of an information set

Different organizations face different productivity challenges, so no one
set of techniques applies to all. Different content, different audiences,
and different business processes can all create the need for the application
of different techniques, or for the choice of one technique over another. In
each case, however the efficiencies achieved are the result of the
application of automation to the information development process. XML is
merely a tool to help build the automated system. It is a means to an end,
not an end in itself.

> According to France's XML survey, all respondants were more efficient
> because of XML.

I would not read too much into this. Would you respond to such a survey if
you had tried and failed to improve your efficiency with XML? And if you had
tried and failed, presumably you would have gone back to your old process
and would no longer be using XML. XML is certainly not a panacea. There are
lots of applications in which it would reduce rather then improve
efficiency.

> A potential client creates sw for a rapidly growing customer base. They
> customize their doc for each customer, which requires tons of conditional
> text, and my guess is that this will soon become unwieldy. They currently
> use FM and RoboHelp. Would XML improve their efficiency? Why? How?

Whether conditional text is encoded in Frame or in XML, the potential to
become unwieldy is the same. XML and Frame are just two of the many
available methods for encoding conditional text. But it is the complexity of
the conditions themselves that will lead to an unwieldy system.

To come up with a system that will not become unwieldy, you need to rethink
the way in which you organize your content. Once you have developed a new
principle of organization, and worked out the processes needed to manage
that content, then you can look at tools to implement the system. Depending
on what organization you come up with, you may find that the tools you need
are provided by an existing publishing or content management tool, or you
may find that you need to develop at least some parts of the tool kit
yourself. If you choose an existing tool, you may find that it uses XML as
part of its system. If you have to develop some part of the system yourself,
you will probably find that adopting XML will make the development of that
system easier.

Remember, however, that any increase in efficiency comes from the
application of an automated process. XML is just one potential tool to help
build the system you need. Moving to XML without first understanding the
automated process you need to improve your efficiency will only lead to
disappointment. Always decide on the process first, then select the best
tools to implement the process.

Mark Baker
Analecta Communications