presentation to dita tc r&d work of convergence between s1000d and dita

31-07-2012 – TC OASIS DITA

Presentation to Dita TCPresentation to Dita TC

R&D work of convergence between R&D work of convergence between S1000D and DitaS1000D and Dita

Jean-Jacques Thomasson representing the French Group working on S1000D and DITA

Company Euriware (Areva)

July 2012

INTRODUCTION


Members of theS1000D-DITA initiative WG

Guillemette Borrel : Technical Mgr of Information Management Dpt at LGM (Consulting Grp) National recognize expert in Data Format Exchange : Documentation

(S1000D/DITA), PLM, Logistic Data (S3000L, 1388-2B), PLCS

Michel Domeon : Technical publications manager at Dassault-Aviation 2002-2010 involved from 94 as chair and co chair within the S1000D management

groups (EPWG, TPSMG, Steering Committee)

Nicolas Dupuy : S1000D Senior Consultant at PTC Co-chairman of S1000D EPWG group since 2006 and GIFAS representative

Philippe Zingoni Business Developer at Antéa after 10 years of CTO

a well-known French reseller of Adobe FrameMaker, PTC IsoDraw and Lattice 3D 10 years of work on S1000D standardization (Expert in CCMS & CGM)

Jean-Jacques Thomasson Detailed resume here after


Life with ML as GMLSGMLXMLLife with MLas … Mother Language

Resume and publications

1984 1989 DCF/GML & DB2 developer (Dassault Système)1989 1997 Pre-sales & services manager at Interleaf France

and SGML/XML evangelist for Europe1997 2006 Technical Director at Nagora then Sonovision-Itep

(misc. publications on XML)2006 2009 Consultant for Total (EDMS for Worldwide

Operations)2010 EDMS Senior expert at Euriware [Areva]

1959

1984

2002

2003

2006

2009

2012


Resume and publications

Member of the French SGML UG (1993-1998)President of XML-France (2001-2003)Contributions to standards through translations

W3C XSLT, DOM, XPath, XML Schema (1998-2002) IETF WebDAV (2001) XML Topics Maps (2003) Other translation : O’Reilly XML Schema (2002)

Books : Schémas XML (Eyrolles – 2002) Modélisation XML (Eyrolles – 2006) 7 articles for Gartner Group (2003-2005)

R&D work : RDM Store project (1993) Complete re-design of the S1000D XML Schemas (2005 – 2006)


The growth of a model : the S1000D case

Air - Land - Sea Aerospace industries

Association

ASD S1000D v2

S1000D v3 ATA 2200

S1000D v4

AIA

Air Transport Association

1984

2003

2012

Military AircraftAECMA 1000D v1 Land & sea

2007

7 European countries

Adopted worldwide

1989



Air - Land - Sea Aerospace industries

Association

ASD S1000D v2

S1000D v3 ATA 2200

S1000D v4

AIA

Air Transport Association

1984

2003

2012

Military AircraftAECMA 1000D v1 Land & sea

2007

7 European countries

Adopted worldwide

1989

Breakthrough with a new meta-

model


S1000D : Initial problem reminder

The natural growth of S1000Ds through the ages Business view:

How to mix different ways of handling of applicability and techdoc organization?

Ease and even feasibility of the standardization work Acceptance by the users (current members and newcomers) of the resulting

standard Technical concerns:

Hierarchical or logical chunking ? Why validity of sub-schemas is important ? What means validity ? What is the concept of fractal validity ? How to maintain consistency between DTDs and XML Schemas versions ?


DITA : Initial problem reminder

A tentative started in 2009 of R&D work to clean up the XML Schemas

12/2009 initial objectives Each sub-schema must be a valid schema by itself, Groups of element can not be derived, Restrictions must be valid derivation of the parent object. Recursive models which indirectly expand the parent model are forbidden by

XML Schema unless there is a formal extension. Irregular structures such as the "fn.class" model which is mixing at the same

level text, inline data elements, structural elements and pure structural elements. It mixes in line elements and main structural elements such as paragraphs. Such models lack of flexibility and possibilities of managing small chunks of information are limited. This question concerns the possibility of considering that specializations address changes in the main structure while domains address the question of inline semantics elements.

The 1.2 schemas make : Impossible individual check up / control / change Hard the sharing of sub schemas between different specializations Extensibility complex

PROPOSED SOLUTION FOR DITA


DITA : proposed solution

A complete re writing of the XML schemas New meta-model respecting the Spec and DITA original extensibility mechanisms A UML representation which could look complex but the concrete implementation

is *very* simple with only 5 basic <include>.



One core package which has no link to other packages


Each specialization has only one <include> to other packages : one link to domain(s) (through which core elements will be included)




At least, each domain has only two links to the [core] package


Same model is used for <dita> root element : it contains only one link to CRTTs and alternatively one to domains unused by CRTTs




Finally, this model ideally combines : The logic of XML schema A « logical » physical hierarchy making a clear border between a core set of

elements, the domains’ elements and the specialization This model will force the future changes of the model to be regular wherever they

will be done : At the core level At the domain level At the specialization level

JOINING DITA AND S1000D


Joining S1000D and DITA:The business cases

Interchange of data between aerospace/defense and other manufacturing companies

To avoid conversions for sub contractors facing multi-standards requirements Particularly true for software components used in weapon and flight systems

Use of DITA maps or S1000D PM to publish both DITA and S1000D content

Use of DITA maps features, such as navigational links (no equivalent in S1000D) Use of applicability filtering at the publication level (both DITA & S1000D) Use the DITA OT to publish (when S1000D publication process is expensive)

Reuse mechanisms DITA : General reuse of any piece of information through conrefs S1000D : reuse of common components (Common Information Repository)


Joining S1000D and DITA:The business cases

Easier implementations for decreasing the acquisition cost of the technology

Creation of software solutions for both S1000D and DITA Common frameworks

A « Basic » structure Many discussions in S1000D French standardization about « S1000D Light » This concept should be used to define a core architecture that could be the base

for advanced specializations

Flexibility S1000D looking for new directions to increase the flexibility of the models


Assembling or building complex schemas

1000D v1

S1000D v2

S1000D v3 DITA 1.1

S1000D v5 & DITA v2

1984

1989

2007

2014 / 2015 ?

DITA 1.0

2007

2005

2001

2010

2003

DITA 1.2

S1000D v42012


Management of very big models

S1000D : 1056 elements (945 complex, 111 simple) 372 attributes 149 simple types and 884 complex types

DITA : 848 éléments (751 complex, 97 simple) 276 attributes 111 simple types and 726 complex types

TOTAL : ≈ 2000 éléments ≈ 650 attributes ≈ 250 simple types and 1600 complex types

It is mandatory to establish communalities to decrease the cost of implementation and maintenance of each


Management of very big models

When merging schemas or grammar, the designer needs to : Know if the name is already in use If yes :

what for ? In the same domain or not ? Are the types compatible or not ?

Know at which level of the schema hierarchy the new component must be designed Core level for an impact on the entire standard : role of DITA TC Specialization level for an impact on one business : role of business groups Inline semantics for a transverse availability : role of DITA TC or business group

Know the exact impact of one modification : On the structures On one particular business But also on documentation


Hierarchical versus logical chunking(of schemas)

Here comes / arises the problem of the logic which is behind the meta-model of the schemas

SGML was allowing physical chunking of DTDs into pieces XML Schema bans that, it only allows for logical chunking Relax NG is so said « a pure hierarchical model »



Authorized in DTDs through the mechanism of SYSTEM entities

which does not exist in XML Schema

Controlled by manual design only in DTDsStrictly enforced with XML Schema

Physical cut up/chunking Logical approach



Physical chunking possibily leads to mess :



An XML Schema can be a tree of valid sub and sub-sub schemas: Where any of the sub-schemas can itself be the root of a tree of schemas And any of the sub-schemas can include any other sub-sub-schemas …

An XML Schemacontaining elements

Definitions or groups of

An XML Schema

An XML Schemacontaining attributes


An XML Schemacontaining complex

types definitions

An XML Schemacontaining simpletypes definitions

Any valid XML Schema



There is no real concept of hierarchy at the meta-schema level: One “sub schema” can itself be the root and the root be, at some time, a sub-

schema In one word : there is no concept of DOCTYPE. No start, no end.



An XML Schema




types definitions





There is no real concept of hierarchy at the meta-schema level:

Set of schemas which are libraries of components / objects

Schemas wearing the business logic



An XML Schema




types definitions




The design can improve:

ReadinessFlexibilityValidity, which will facilitate:

Implementation of new mechanisms (Example : internal and external mechanism of applicability inherited from ATA)

Use of XML Schema conforming software tools

Better separation between business logic and technical structures “Schemas as a Lego” Development of modular style sheets in line with modular schemas

Control, maintenance and documentation : Avoiding duplication of same types Producing dictionaries of models, elements, attributes and types (already

available on S1000D side)


Be concrete :

The S1000D-DITA working group is currently working on:


Be concrete :

6 Proofs of concept have been done POC 1 : addition of a new domain in technicalContent which modifies <keyword>

and limits the types of topics to only <reference> POC 2 : limitation to only <reference> and domain poc1-d POC 3 : addition of the new type of topic proceed by duplication of an existing

type of topic. POC 4 : addition of the entire set of S1000D elements (but v2.3 version) POC 5 : addition of the latest v4 elements of S1000D, name dmodule is used

instead of proceed, one same instance is made of DITA topics and S1000D modules.

POC 5 RNG : POC 5 converted to RNG POC 6 : Reorganization of the physical model and extension of the study to

publication modules : pm, map and bookmap. Each can now be a mixture of any others.

Other studies Business case and positioning Relax NG


POC made with RNG

We did a RNG version of the XML schemaTwo problems were found :

No recursive include : Meta model of Relax NG is strictly hierarchical making impossible the concept

of libraries of schema components Root element is mandatory

<NotAllowed> is sued to avoid the problemo It makes individual testing of sub schemas (grammars) impossibleo For example : reference.mod.rngo Using <notAllowed> and @combine=“choice” changes a bit the concept of validation of

the sub-schemas


POC made with RNG

example : reference.mod.rngGrammar :


POC made with RNG

Case by case testing of parts of a grammar such as reference.rng is hard or even impossible :

Producing the instance reduced to one particular element is not possible This occurs with any of the sub-schemas of the RNG version

On Schemas side, any element can be individually tested: Since Schema are « really » (not artificially) valid No Doctype or equivalent : Any element at any time can be the root element of an

instance Design based on testing becomes very easy New proposals can be easily prototyped for discussions Training and documentation are much more simple

Development time is concentrated on the design of the content model rather than spent in lexical and consistency problems Focus is made on having a coherent catalog of components which are then

easy to control, implement, test and document


POC made with RNG

Example with the elements of topic reference:


POC made with RNG

Testing can be indifferently made at the root element level <reference> and at anay sub-level, as here after with sub-element <propdesc>:


POC made with RNG

And here is the test from te root element:


POC made with RNG

Or any of the elements part of that branch of the structure (abstract for example)


POC made with RNG

If you want to test elements defined by reference.mod.rng, then the test is limited

You need to use reference.rng which only allows a test from the root element <reference>


POC made with RNG

No document editor supporting natively Relax NG: FrameMaker : no PTC Arbortext : no XML Author (Word) from Quark : no

Support by professional wyziwyg structured editors is a major concern:

Use of additional module such as simplified english Paper oriented presentation still requires precise positioning and interactive

control of layout Revision management, dictionaries, layout of tables… Integration with Techdoc Mgt systems, PLM, EAM and so ….


Conclusion

Respecting the intrinsic logic of XML Schema is a *secure* way for extending the models to cover a larger spectrum of business needsOur R&D work shows that the new model can join:

The physical representation is logical for a human being. Moreover, the tree of folders is not rigid but is highly flexible: the sub-folders or the contained sub-schemas can be moved all around if necessary.

The logical model not only sticks to XML Schema meta-model but also has a sense for both humans (it is easy to understand)

It applies the concept of modularization not only at the information level but also at the schemas’ level:

Fractal tree of schemas capable of growth like a natural tree Authorizing the management of very small pieces of information Probably extendable to concept of modular stylesheets


Conclusion

With the proposed approach, version 2 of DITA can immediately embrace the Aerospace& Defence market of Logistics Support.

On his side, S1000D can take benefit from the DITA experience in software documentation.

Instead of reinventing the wheel, S1000D and DITA groups can focus on the software tools and toolbox surrounding the standards for a better ratio efficiency / cost.


Demo


QuestionsQuestions

Jean-Jacques ThomassonEuriware

presentation to dita tc r&d work of convergence between s1000d and dita

Documents

s1000d xml schemas

tc oasis ditathe growth

tc oasis ditas1000d

tc oasis ditadita

tc oasis ditaresume

tc oasis ditalife

s1000d case31

s1000d standardization