Just because it is there you don’t necessarily have to use it!

Over the past four or five months I have been hearing stories (are they going to be apocryphal I wonder) about how some prospective users are going to be using S1000D. In the main these stories do seem to involve the same type of implementer – the XML junkie (am I being unkind?). These people have been looking at the DTDs / Schemas from a structure point of view without understanding the principles behind S1000D.

Some of the implementations that are being proposed are based on their normal experience. Unfortunately these implementations will not stand the test of time.

What, you may ask am I talking about here?

What S1000D Gives Us

The S1000D Specification provides us with the means to produce Technical Matter which is future proofed. It does this by using the non-proprietary storage format of SGML/XML. It also gives us the mechanisms to handle cross-referencing between DMs and the use of graphics which do not rely on filenames.

So what, you may say, we know all about that!

What some are trying to implement

Well, what I am hearing is that some who are trying to implement the S1000D specification are not aware of the purpose of the refdm mechanism. What they appear to be implementing is the standard XML method of anchors which of course relies on filenames.

What is worrying is that even when it is explained to them that this is not supposed to be used during authoring they fail to see why they should not use it. I guess that this is because they have not been involved in the Technical Publications Industry for very long and do not understand the significance of projects being live over 10, 20 or even 30 years. (See below for a challenge.)

With projects lasting this length of time the only sure thing is the Data Module Code. OK so we all know this, but apparently there are some who don't. Certainly in the training courses that I give in the UK and elsewhere this is one area which is covered and discussed. Some are quicker on seeing the advantages than others but all, in the end, see the benefits of the approach given to us in S1000D.

Having just completed courses in the past two months for some who are already users, I can confirm that there area aspects of the S1000D Specification which are not obvious. To be honest I am not surprised at this after all the PDF file which contains Issue 2 Change 2 is just under 55Mb big and over 2300 pages long (including blank pages etc). How does a newcomer to the S1000D world find their way around this without knowing where to look?

The Quick way?

Perhaps a two or three day course is a quick route to knowing what to do – or perhaps I am biased. Personally I get a great deal of enjoyment out of these courses. Meeting others involved in Technical Publications in a learning/discussion environment where we all learn from each other is very beneficial for all concerned. From these encounters with real people doing real work (some already involved in S1000D) provides even more background and we all benefit. Where some are having a specific difficulty that can be removed by a change in the S1000D Specification I encourage the delegate concerned to make a change request and in that way encourage them to take part in the S1000D ‘family of users’.

As you have probably realised by now, I don't like blowing my own trumpet too much but I do believe passionately in enabling people to work efficiently and from a position of knowledge. How else can they work properly.

This knowledge is required at different levels by

• Managers who will need to oversee the implementation of S1000D Projects
• Project Leaders who will need to actually put the knowledge and infrastructure in place for S1000D, and
• The Authors who will need to get their hands dirty producing the data to S1000D

I know that my employer will be only too happy to quote you for organising a course on S1000D either here in the UK or elsewhere. Details can be found byfollowing this link to the Mekon Learning web page and this one to the Aerospace and Defence Training web page

The Challenge

As I was writing this Blog entry it occurred to me to enlist our readers vto find out just how long projects last. Of course some projects appear to go on for a very long time but there are often iterations of the equipment which are, to all intents and purposes, completely new projects i.e. a complete redesign with new documentation.

So the challenge for you is:
what is the longest running project with the same documentation?

The Limitations

I think that I would like to put some limitations on the challenge because I do remember visiting one UK MoD Establishment where I was shown documentation for the Spitfire and Hurricane fighters – still current because there a number of these marvellous aircraft still flying. Although these handbooks were still maintained, the level of activity was virtually zero so I think that perhaps we should stipulate that the actual project should still be active with documentation changes still taking place fairly regularly.