Re: [jats-list] Related objects inside sec-meta

["Wendell Piez wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Mark, yes, that's valid, though all in all I'd far prefer the
relationship to be expressed in metadata, where it belongs. I like the
flags.

Mary's solution is something like what this system might grow into
eventually ... I'm not really the one to say ... but for now we need
something relatively lightweight (and ideally not requiring
extension).

In the meantime, where do I log feedback towards an extension request for
BITS?

Thanks, Wendell

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Mary McRae mmcrae@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Wendell,
>
>
>
> IQ Solutions has a somewhat-similar use case where sections of a publication
(either JATS or BITS) are repurposed into a mobile app. In our case, it's
handled through a set of pseudo-namespaced elements (clientname:).  We use a
unique metadata group that allows multiple mobile apps to be defined, and then
use a container element that includes "chunk-specific" metadata and allows
sec, p, table, fig, list, etc. as children to identify the actual portion of
text that's excerpted.
>
>
>
> Mary P McRae
>
> XML Strategist and Technical Project Manager, IQ Solutions
>
> mmcrae@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Wendell Piez wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 10:56 AM
>
> To: jats-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Subject: [jats-list] Related objects inside sec-meta
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Using BITS, I have a defined relationship between fragments of XML at the
sec level (could also be an app) and a set of external objects.
>
> (In this case they are items in a kind of DITA-map-like thing, which
allocates contents of the XML fragments into larger combinations that do not
necessarily correspond to the arrangement of the sources.)
>
>
>
> I'm thinking about inserting a related-object into the XML (sec or app as
the case may be), which seems like it could sorta be for this, and sec-meta,
which is valid in either of sec or app. But related-object is not valid
directly inside sec-meta.
>
>
>
> Is my solution to sneak the related-object in somehow, to extend the DTD to
permit what I want, or to use a different element to express this relation?
BITS 1.0 sec-meta has only
>
>
>
> ((contrib-group)*, (abstract)*, (kwd-group)*, permissions?)
>
>
>
> which doesn't offer up anything obvious for "identifier of some other
publication, which includes/calls this section".
>
>
>
> Ideas?
>
>
>
> Thanks! Wendell
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Wendell Piez | http://www.wendellpiez.com XML | XSLT | electronic publishing
Eat Your Vegetables _____oo_________o_o___ooooo____ooooooo_^
>
>
>
>



--
Wendell Piez | http://www.wendellpiez.com
XML | XSLT | electronic publishing
Eat Your Vegetables
_____oo_________o_o___ooooo____ooooooo_^