Re: [jats-list] JATS - Gripes and Suggestions

Subject: Re: [jats-list] JATS - Gripes and Suggestions
From: "G. Ken Holman g.ken.holman@xxxxxxxxx" <jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 20:39:33 -0000
At 2020-04-29 20:13 +0000, Piez, Wendell A. (Fed) wendell.piez@xxxxxxxx wrote:
Along with this idea, how about revisiting Orange? Debbie had a good explanation as to why today's Orange doesn't work or at any rate has few users (sorry I wish I could paraphrase). But the idea of Orange is a sound one. Or something between Orange and Blue. (Ochre?)

I'm late to this party ... what have been the problems with orange? It takes away things from the authors that are not their purview.


The conference proceedings required orange and I liked that it took away things that are better left for publishing.

Another reason? Convincing technologists that JATS or a JATS-based standard will actually simplify things is difficult when a document model has hundreds of elements, a majority of which they can't see ever using, but must account for somehow.

When you say "must account for somehow", can users not simply use what they need or be told what they are allowed to use?


. . . . . . Ken


-- Contact info, blog, articles, etc. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/j/ | Check our site for free XML, XSLT, XSL-FO and UBL developer resources | Streaming hands-on XSLT/XPath 2 training class @ US$45 (5 hours free) | Essays (UBL, XML, etc.) http://www.linkedin.com/today/author/gkholman |

Current Thread