Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.

Wheeler NISO STS: An XML Standard for Standards

1 871 vues

Publié le

This joint presentation was provided by Robert Wheeler of ASME and Howard Gilson of ASTM International during the NISO event, XML for Standards Publishers, held on April 24, 2017 in Washington DC.

Publié dans : Formation
  • Hello! I can recommend a site that has helped me. It's called ⇒ www.HelpWriting.net ⇐ So make sure to check it out!
    Voulez-vous vraiment ?  Oui  Non
    Votre message apparaîtra ici
  • I pasted a website that might be helpful to you: ⇒ www.WritePaper.info ⇐ Good luck!
    Voulez-vous vraiment ?  Oui  Non
    Votre message apparaîtra ici
  • If you have any problems with writing, feel free to ask our writers for help! ⇒ HelpWriting.net ⇐ is ready to help with any kind of academic writing!
    Voulez-vous vraiment ?  Oui  Non
    Votre message apparaîtra ici
  • Get Paid For Your Opinions! Earn $5-$10 cash on your first survey. ■■■ https://tinyurl.com/vd3y33w
    Voulez-vous vraiment ?  Oui  Non
    Votre message apparaîtra ici
  • Soyez le premier à aimer ceci

Wheeler NISO STS: An XML Standard for Standards

  1. 1. NISO STS: An XML Standard for Standards Robert Wheeler Director of Publishing Technologies, ASME & co-chair of NISO working group on Standard Tag Set (STS) Howard Gilson IT Product Services Director, ASTM International
  2. 2. Agenda • It’s What We Do • A Standard For Standards • The Process • Our Point of View – ASTM – ASME • New Possibilities • Conclusions
  3. 3. Prison; Obvious Place to Start • Game Theory – why “rational” individuals might not cooperate • Scenario – 2 criminals, let’s call them Howard and Robert – Arrested and separated for crimes against XML – If H and R both betray each other, H and R get 2 years in jail – If H betrays R and R stays silent, H will be free and R will serve 3 years – If R betrays H and H stays silent, R will be free and H will serve 3 years – If H and R both stay silent, both will serve 1 year in prison
  4. 4. Prisoner’s Dilemma Silent (H) Betray (H) Silent (R) H – 1 Year R – 1 Years H – 0 Years R – 3 Years Betray (R) H – 3 Years R – 0 Year H – 2 Years R – 2 Years
  5. 5. Standards Development Organizations • [An SDO] is part of a small but significant group which serves the public through the creation of standards that promote reliability, interoperability and quality thus bringing economic and other societal benefits. • Missions & Credos – ASTM: Helping our world work better. – ASME: Setting the Standard…for the benefit of humanity – Dell: Our mission is to be the most successful IT systems company in the world by delivering the best customer experience in all markets we serve
  6. 6. A Standard for Standards? • Standards developers have published independently each other for years with little “standardization.” • Existing document standards are not sufficient for Standards – Updates/Versioning – Committee authoring/Revising – Adaptations • NISO STS provides a framework for increasing value and reducing costs for more standards developers (SDOs) while retaining value for NSBs.
  7. 7. STS Benefits: New Workflows • Streamline production workflows – Greater automation – Pre-publication content validation • Reduce time to publish • Improved tools – more innovative tools available because of increased market size – less customization needed from publishing vendors • Lower costs from production vendors
  8. 8. STS Benefits: New Products • Easier production of HTML, ePub, Mobile • Develop new products • Aids when multiple standards are used across an enterprise or for a single project; • Co-publish standards • Interchange with distributor partners • Inter-standard linking – Click-through linking – Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs)
  9. 9. STS Benefits: Discovery • Consistent metadata delivery to distribution partners • Site-crawling indexers benefit from consistencies • Encourage adoption with industry users that are publishing internal standards • Improve end-user information discovery – Consistent metadata aids library discovery – Improved library management
  10. 10. Why Create NISO STS? • ISO STS has been: – Successful for ISO and NSBs – Too limited for other standards bodies • NISO STS will provide: – A stable standard for most standards publishers – Greater simplicity for tool and conversion vendors – A common format for sharing • Metadata • Full text – Common XML foundation across standards and journals • Lower barrier to entry for XML publication
  11. 11. NISO STS Goals • Expand for SDO and other use beyond NSBs • Align with JATS 1.1 standard, and future versions • Support additional structures – Indexes – OASIS/CALS tables • Maintain backwards compatibility for existing users of ISO STS
  12. 12. Why We Started With JATS? • Standards & journal articles share structures – Sections – Tables – Figures – Equations – Bibliography • Well-developed and well-tested model • Easily modifiable for Standards use • Strong third party support
  13. 13. Retaining Connection with JATS Wide range of STEM content better associated into the future – Scholarly articles – Conference proceedings – Supporting research – Commentary – Standards/Normative documents – Codes – Addendums/Annexes – Redlines – Errata
  14. 14. It’s All In The Family NLM JATS 1.1 (NISO Z39.96-2015) ISO STS NISO STS
  15. 15. JATS Release History • NLM 1.0: released April 2003 • NLM 2.0: released December 2004 • NLM 2.3: released March 2007 • NLM 3.0: released November 2008 • Moved to NISO, renamed JATS: July 2009 • First JATS-Con: November 2010 • ANSI NISO Z39.96 JATS 1.0: released August 2012 • ANSI NISO Z39.96 JATS 1.1: released January 2016
  16. 16. Why Set Suite? • Separate models will be available with MathML2 and MathML3 for compatibility • Separate models will be available with XHTML tables, and with XHTML and CALS tables – “Interchange” — XHTML-only – “Production”— XHTML and CALS XHTML+MathML2 (Interchange) XHTML+CALS+MathML2 (Extended) XHTML+MathML3 (Interchange) XHTML+CALS+MathML3 (Extended)
  17. 17. NISO STS Steering Committee Kim Breitfelder, IEEE Jo Collins, NEN Laurent Galichet, ISO Debbie Lapeyre, Mulberry Technologies, Inc. Eamonn Neylon, Signal Arc Gareth Oakes, Global Publishing Solutions Evan Owens, Cenveo Publisher Services Markus Plessel, IEEE Tim Preuss, Silverchair Information Systems Antti Saari, Finnish Standards Association (SFS) Ivan Salcedo, BSI Al Sanders, Boeing, Greg Saunders, Office of the Asst. Sec. of Defense for Research & Engineering (OASD-R&E) Brian Trombley, DCL B. Tommie Usdin, Mulberry Technologies, Inc. Mike Visser, Techstreet, Clarivate Lesley West, ASTM Cord Wischhöfer, DIN Elizabeth Wolf, Copyright Clearance Center Hong Xu, CEN Wei Zhao, Ontario Council of University Libraries Observers: Anja Bielfeld Electronic Publishing Specialist, IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) Laurent Gombert, AFNOR Groupe George Gulla, ANSI Bob Hager, ANSI Co-chairs Bruce Rosenblum, Inera Inc. Robert Wheeler, ASME Working Group Members
  18. 18. NISO STS Technical Committee Heather Flanagan, RFC Editor Laurent Galichet, ISO Howard Gilson, ASTM Frans Gooskens, NEN Vinay Gupta, Edaptive Technologies LLC Bob Hollowell, ASME Gerrit Imsieke, le-tex Publishing Services * JATS & BITS Working Group Members Serge Juillerat, ISO Debbie Lapeyre, Mulberry Technologies, Inc.* Nikos Markantonatos, Atypon Systems Inc.* Mary McRae, IQ Solutions Ken Rawson, IEEE B. Tommie Usdin, Mulberry Technologies, Inc.* David Winchell, XSB Inc. Observer: Bob Dreyfuss, Consultant Co-chairs Bruce Rosenblum, Inera Inc.* Robert Wheeler, ASME Working Group Members
  19. 19. Sub-Groups STS (1) • SDO Metadata – SDO-specific metadata – Co-developed or Co-published standards • Citing Standards – Normative references – Inline citations – DOI links • Terms and Definitions – TBX – Other models
  20. 20. Sub-Groups STS (2) • Translations – Metadata – Marking added or removed text • Section types – Standard attributes to define standard sections – e.g. foreword, intro, scope, terms
  21. 21. NISO STS Timeline • Remaining Timeline – 30-Day Public Review: April-May 2017 – Respond to Public Comments & Finalize: May-June 2017 – STS Committee Vote & NISO Topic Committee Vote: July 2017 – NISO Voting Member Vote: August-September 2017 – Response to “Negatives” & ANSI Review: September 2017 – ANSI Approval & Formal Published Standard: October 2017 • Future – Continuous Maintenance/Standing Committee
  22. 22. STS Adopters – API (2) – ASI (Austria) (1) – ASCE (1)* – ASME (2) – ASTM (2) – BSI (2) – CEN (1) – DIN (2) – DS (2) Adopted (1)/Adopting (2)/Considering (3) ISOSTS or JATS-based* – IEEE (1)* – ISO (1) – NEN (1) – SA (2) – SAE (1)* – SFS (1) – SIS (3) – Standards Norway (1) – U.S. DoD (3)
  23. 23. ASTM and XML • In the 1990s, ASTM International converted its standards set SGML using Arbortext and the now Contenta. • Built a full customized digital path based on XML. 25 Years of XML
  24. 24. ASTM and XML • At ASTM, our internal presentations typically show XML as a solid brick foundation that our products are built on. • ASTM is always looking to improve its XML foundation, and we saw the value of the NISO STS option. • We are already building new products that capitalize the benefits to the NISO STS format.
  25. 25. ASME’s Story • In 2013, ASME published our most important Code/Standard from XML (based on DocBook), the culmination of a project that had begun 6 years earlier. First Edition from 1914 – 147 pp. 2013 Edition – 31 products, 17,000 pp.
  26. 26. ASME’s Story • The BPVC (incomplete) XML environment was highly customized, and thus, fragile, and thus, unsustainable in the long run and for our other standards. • Following the 2013 publication, we looked to see what we could learn from, what we could salvage, and what would have the greatest positive impact if changed. • After much to do, we had a day long face-to-face meeting with some of our development partners, and at the end of it had decided on DITA XML and an intermediary format driven by XSL for composition (in the old 3B2/APP/PE).
  27. 27. ASME’s Story • We walked across the street to the annual SSP conference only to hear that ISO was considering proposing work on the ISOSTS, to couple it with JATS under NISO, and make the a formal standard for standards…. • And we thought, if there’s going to be a standard, we certainly want to be part of that! • In May 2015, ASTM and ASME submitted a NISO work item proposal and sponsorship for the NISO STS project.
  28. 28. How STS Can Impact Your Business? • That’s up to you • STS provides an enabling technology – Updated workflow – New products – Common platform for vendors – Greater interoperability • STS does not drive your business decisions – Business requirements drive technology decisions; not vice versa
  29. 29. Interoperable XML Usage SDO 1 Word SDO 2 XML SDO 3 Word SDO 4 XML 2 STS SDO 1 Web Delivery Platform Shared Web Web Platform Transform 2 STS Transform 2 JSON SDO 4 API Applications (PLM, CAD, DB, etc.)
  30. 30. Conclusions • ISO STS has been successful for ISO and NSBs • NISO STS expands STS for SDO needs • Benefits of using a standard XML model – Production efficiencies – New product opportunities – Easier interchange with development and distribution partners
  31. 31. Contact Us • Howard Gilson hgilson@astm.org • Robert Wheeler WheelerR@asme.org