RE: XML/DocBook for newbies

["Fred Ridder" <docudoc -at- hotmail -dot- com>]

I find it interesting that I use the same "top-down" and "bottom-up"
adjectives when talking about DocBook vs. DITA, but I apply them
in exactly the opposite way.

Lisa seems to be defining them from the writer's standpoint, where
in DITA the topic is often the starting point and combinations of
topics are periodically collected and arranged into deliverables. But my
use of "top-down" to describe DITA is based on the way the DTD
is architected--starting with the broadest classification of the topics
that comprise a document (concept, procedure, reference) and only
specializing where there is need or value to the specialization. And
also the way that DITA defines most specializations in terms of the
parent element types so that specialized topics can usually be reused
at a higher level even in documents that don't "understand" the
specific specialization that has been used in the topic.

In the case of DocBook, it has always seemed to me that the design
started with an encyclopedic catalog of all the atomic types of content
and built up a myriad of compund elements from there. But I suppose
when it comes time to use it, the most common thing is to start at
the top and burrow down.

My opinions only; I don't speak for Intel.
Fred Ridder
Intel
Parsippany, NJ