Fwd: Re: [jats-list] BITS: Is there a canonical way to group multiple appendices and a glossary under a single 'Appendix' heading?

Subject: Fwd: Re: [jats-list] BITS: Is there a canonical way to group multiple appendices and a glossary under a single 'Appendix' heading?
From: "Imsieke, Gerrit, le-tex" <gerrit.imsieke@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 01:12:31 +0200
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [jats-list] BITS: Is there a canonical way to group multiple appendices and a glossary under a single 'Appendix' heading?
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 01:10:25 +0200
From: Imsieke, Gerrit, le-tex <gerrit.imsieke@xxxxxxxxx>
Organization: le-tex publishing services GmbH
To: TOM MOWLAM <tom.mowlam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


Hi Tom,

Of course you can shuffle backmatter components for the HTML rendering
according to some rules. But it would certainly require less
configuration if the XML content already included all components in a
linear fashion, with the appropriate nesting and with appropriate
tagging. I'm not against solving things programmatically (I make a
living off of XSLT programming). But if the input's structure is exactly
the same as the output structure, if both make sense, and if you have a
hard time mapping to/fro an intermediate XML format, then you'll ask
yourself whether the content model that the XML format
permits/prescribes is perfectly appropriate.

I'm well aware of the fact that you won't be able to model each and
every quirk that you'll find in printed books in a given XML
grammar/vocabulary. If you need a descriptive general-purpose book XML
schema, you should probably turn to TEI. BITS is pursuing a more
balanced approach between descriptive and prescriptive. But I don't
think that the backmatter structure that I presented is very uncommon
among scientific/professional books. And I think BITS should strive to
offer canonical encodings for common structural phenomena.

Some of the book-specific parts in BITS are still young and untried,
compared to its JATS core. Therefore I hope that the committee will
appreciate this feedback from an early adopter.

Gerrit


On 03.09.2013 00:42, TOM MOWLAM wrote:
Hi Gerrit

I am no BITS expert - but we use JATS and will use BITS for the books we publish in future - so I am replying directly, because I am not sure how useful I will be!

I was wondering about:
"""
But if the glossary was moved before the appendices, there would be no 'Appendix' heading before the glossary which probably isn't acceptable for the author and/or the publisher. If the glossary were moved past the appendices, the order in the electronic pulication (EPUB derived from BITS) would deviate from what's been printed, and this also seems unacceptable to some of the parties involved.
"""

Is it necessary that the order of sections in the XML is directly reflected in the order in the electronic or print versions?
Perhaps the rendering to EPUB can be clever and insert the parts in a different order to how it is included in the XML - ie by using the value of <title> or some attribute of <title>, and some associated logic in the rendering code about the order of the parts.

This is as much a question, as a solution (note, I do not use BITS yet!) - but perhaps you have not already considered this.

Best wishes
Tom

---
Tom Mowlam
Director of Operations
Ubiquity Press Ltd.

tom.mowlam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
07800 564 210
Skype: tom.mowlam

www.ubiquitypress.com
@ubiquitypress





On 2 Sep 2013, at 23:32, "Imsieke, Gerrit, le-tex" <gerrit.imsieke@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

There's a book whose backmatter consists of a glossary, two appendices and and index. In the printed version, the glossary and the appendices are contained in a book-part-like structure with the heading 'Appendix'. The index heading is intended to be on the same level as this 'Appendix' heading. The individual appendices below the 'Appendix' heading have their own distinct headings (let's call them 'Author Biographies' and 'Handouts').

What is the canonical BITS way to encode this structure? I'll present a valid yet clumsy and an invalid variant.

Valid alternative:

  <book-back>
    <book-part dtd-version="0.2">
      <book-part-meta>
        <title-group>
          <title>Appendix</title>
        </title-group>
      </book-part-meta>
      <back>
        <glossary>
          <title>Glossary</title>
        </glossary>
        <app>
          <title>Handouts</title>
        </app>
        <app>
          <title>Author Bios</title>
        </app>
      </back>
    </book-part>
    <index>
      <title-group>
        <title>Index</title>
      </title-group>
    </index>
  </book-back>

I don't like that there's a book-part that could, in principle, host all kind of stuff that doesn't belong into a book's backmatter (front, body).

Or the use of a book-part in a book-back could lead you to think that the content now go into the book-part's body because you're already in the backmatter. Until you find out that an appendix or glossary can't be in the body.

Because I was kind of loath to use a book-part for the collective 'Appendix', I thought of using app-group, like this:

  <book-back>
    <app-group>
      <title>Appendix</title>
      <glossary>
        <title>Glossary</title>
      </glossary>
      <app>
        <title>Author Bios</title>
      </app>
    </app-group>
    <index>
      <title-group>
        <title>Index</title>
      </title-group>
    </index>
  </book-back>

This looks more lightweight and appropriate in my view, except that glossary isnbt allowed in an app-group (only app elements are allowed there).

In principle, one could extract the glossary from the Appendix, leaving the two appendices proper under the Appendix heading, in an app-group. But if the glossary was moved before the appendices, there would be no 'Appendix' heading before the glossary which probably isn't acceptable for the author and/or the publisher. If the glossary were moved past the appendices, the order in the electronic pulication (EPUB derived from BITS) would deviate from what's been printed, and this also seems unacceptable to some of the parties involved.

So is there a third way to encode this in a natural way, or do you consider the book-part way (first alternative) as a natural way already? Or do you also think (as I do) that there should be a generic container to group backmatter components? It could be app-group, but maybe with a book-part-meta instead of a mere title element.

What do you think?

Gerrit



-- Gerrit Imsieke GeschC$ftsfC<hrer / Managing Director le-tex publishing services GmbH Weissenfelser Str. 84, 04229 Leipzig, Germany Phone +49 341 355356 110, Fax +49 341 355356 510 gerrit.imsieke@xxxxxxxxx, http://www.le-tex.de

Registergericht / Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Leipzig
Registernummer / Registration Number: HRB 24930

GeschC$ftsfC<hrer: Gerrit Imsieke, Svea Jelonek,
Thomas Schmidt, Dr. Reinhard VC6ckler

Current Thread