West Putting Structured Documents to Work

© ASTM International
Putting Structured
Documents
to Work
24 April, 2017
www.astm.org

© ASTM International 2
Embracing Technology
©2015-2016 Glad-Sad
For 50 years ASTM’s
position has been to
identify and harness
technologies in
publishing to
• Automate editing
and composition
• Minimize risk
of error
• Serve members
with new tools
• Find new and
better ways for
customers to get
to the content
they need.
24 April, 2017Structured Documents
https://yarr.me

ASTM Compass Home Page

ASTM Compass Search Result

ASTM Compass Online Standard

ASTM’s Goal
-Greater internal control of data
-Fewer production handoffs
-Digital Path from standards development through composition and distribution
-Final document output(s) as close in steps to the original draft as possible, no matter
the format.
Timeline
-1996: SGML-first workflow devised
-1998 and 1999: Dual workflow redundancy as failsafe (never needed)
-1999: SGML Conversion Complete
-Editors editing and composing in SGML
-Converted 6500 standards (PDF only)
Mark Up Language –
Phase I Conversion to SGML

Mark Up Language – Phase I
Tools:
-XyEnterprise PDM CMS
-Arbortext Epic Editor
-XyEnterprise XPP Composition and Styling
Cost: $3 million
Savings: $800K/annually
Ballot to published PDF:
-Prior to SGML—18 or more weeks after standards approval

Old Workflow, SGML
Word Template
Editor codes
SGML
Repository Omnimark
PDF Redlines RTF/MSWord™
Reference
Library
XSLT
HTML
HTML Redline
Metadata file

The Interim Years– Phase II
2000, Redlines
2000, Versioning (Historicals)
2000-2010, Continued tightening of process, further
automation, styles sheets refined
2002, Develop collaboration tool/online member area
2006, HTML (active and redlines)
2011, Switched to digital printing at
annual savings $ .5 mil
Ballot approval to published PDF:
- 2004—2-6 weeks

A few words on HTML– Phase II
• ASTM wanted an alternative output to PDF
to further develop online subscriptions
• Began development of industry-specific
HTML portals
• However, ASTM maintained a caveat
warning there could be inaccuracies.
-PDF remained the “official” standard.
2011, began proof/check of the existing HTML
against PDF with goal to remove caveat prior to
XML conversion (new portal product)

A few words on HTML– Phase II
• Corrections made/caveat down
• Time to complete: 13 months
• Created HTML versions of standards and ASTM
Book of Standards volumes as subscriptions.
• Developed custom collections as online
subscriptions.

XML Conversion– Phase III
Why XML?
• Provides opportunity to further tighten
distance from document creation to published
standard
• Outputs would have a more direct path from
file master (XML)
• SGML never caught on (very complex)
• SGML suffered from lack of industry support
• Easier to unlock content for partners
(flexibility for future)

XML Conversion– Phase III
Why XML?
• Machine interoperability
• Programming resources/availability
• Becoming standard language
• Already a standard in scholarly publishing
• Customers adopting (academic, corporate, govt.)
• Ability to produce alternative outputs from single source
• More granular change management

XML Conversion–Timeline
• 90,000 pages x 2 to compose and review
(PDF and HTML)
• Fall 2010, initial project plan envisioned and completed
• 2011, project plan modified, team developed,
prototypes launched
• March 2012, conversion commences
• November 2012, conversion complete
• 2014, new schema structure considered as new XML
collaboration tools explored

XML Conversion–Highlights
• Used the same tool set as 1996 (change of
product name only):
-SDL: Contenta CMS
-PTC: Arbortext Epic Editor
-SDL: XPP Composition and Styling
-Using existing tools minimized skill impact
• Conversions done by volume as soon as book
published for 2012
• Supplier partners brought together/project
success dependent on their ability to correlate
with each other

XML Conversion–Equations
• Converted SGML equations to MathML
• Tables already in CALS; did not require
conversion
• Font changed during conversion, special
characters addressed
• Program-assisted proofreading of text
and tables with equations being manually
read 4 times.
• MathML will be more commonly fed directly
to browsers in future
• For now, we convert to GIFs/PNGs for
HTML docs.

XML Conversion–Features
• Based DTD on existing SGML
• Create new HTML as output from XML
• Built all new customer portal for new content
(ASTM Compass®)
• Created HTML tools such as annotations for customers
• Cost: $1.3 mil ($1.7 less than SGML)

Workflow, XML
Editorial XML
Repository XSLT
Distribution XML
DOI >>
CrossRef
XPP
PDF
Taxonomic
Index-XML
Redlines
RTF/MSWord™
Reference
Master File
XHTML
XHTML Redline
Metadata
Formats
NISOSTS in
Future?
NISOSTS

So where did we fail?
These were our critical errors we had to overcome:
• Not understanding our data. Example: 25 different
Notes in standards could look alike, but the old
composition code behind each of those 25 notes could
have been structured 25 different ways.
• Choosing to convert instead of just rekeying.
In retrospect, we would have been more efficient
long-term with a rekey.

So where did we fail?
• Not having crystal clear understanding of our
supplier’s expectations of the work needed.
• Our vendor parsed and said we were in the clear, but
parsing is not composing, and the documents were
not properly composing.
• Thinking we could ask our members to write
standards using an online XML-first development
tool.
• Every step where we didn’t talk to our members and
users and find out what their needs were.

So where did we succeed?
• Team goals across divisions (editorial, IT).
• Having a supportive President. We were weeks from
having to pull the entire SGML conversion in the ‘90s
but for a 5-figure emergency fund approved to move
forward and fix errors
• Having a supportive President. We were in real
trouble within the projected cost for the XML conversion
because of a misunderstanding over required QA in the
‘12 but for a 6-figure emergency fund approved to move
forward and QA to member expectations
• Importing a leader who truly understood our
data/long-term vision.

Mark Up Language – Post XML
ASTM’s prime goal for introducing a
mark up language remains the
same…reduce the “hand offs” of its
standards down the production line,
getting the final document as close in
steps to original document creation,
no matter the format.

Being Found
Photo from First-Impressions-Networking-Tips, Buzz-Strayer.edu

PUBLISHER CONTENT
AASHTO
API
MIL
UOP
ACTIVE JOURNALS CLOSED JOURNALS
METADATA, CONTENT
PROCESSING AND
DELIVERY HUB
1. Pull Metadata and PDFs
from ASTM MarkLogic
2. Manage Master Metadata
3. Manage PDFs
4. Filter and Transform Metadata
Feed for Each Delivery Channel
5. Deliver to Each Delivery Channel
BOOKS
PROCEEDINGS
CHAPTERS
STPs
Manual /Monographs
Data Series
ASTM STANDARDS
(currently CSV)
Compendex/
Scopus
EBSCO ExLibris OCLC Portico Proquest Thomson
Reuters
KUDOS TDNET
ASTM Discovery Services Conceptual Diagram
Diagram courtesy of DCL

ASTM, the Last 12 Months
• ASTM Compass®, 90+ updates
• ASTM SpecBuilder, a doc. collaboration management tool
• ASTM Lab Directory/Testing
• ASTM Training and E-Learning
• Explored transclusion as change management
• Readying a generic version of ASTM Compass
• Introducing select publishers’ content on ASTM Compass
• Navigation/taxonomy, added: Turkish, Korean, German, and
Japanese bringing languages to 12 – all documents indexed
• Discovery, discovery, discovery!!
• SVG supplied to browsers with PNG/TIFF back-up
• Support and participate in NISO activity to develop an
XML standard based on ISO’s ISOSTS for standards
(anticipated Fall 2017)

Customer Demand Product Development
• VOC
• Total solution
• ASTM Compass®, x5 updates 2017, UX update
• ASTM collaboration management tool launch
• ASTM Training and E-Learning, new platform
• Testing and International Lab Directory system updates
• Transclusion with semantic capabilities, soft launch test
• Continue support for NISOSTS activity
• Expand ASTM thesaurus
• Continue exploration of 3D modelling from our
figures/tables/equations in next generation “smart
manufacturing” requirements
• Still ingest Word/similar
• Continued improvements in change management
• Output XML version of NISOSTS along with current formats

Questions?
www.astm.org

West Putting Structured Documents to Work

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie West Putting Structured Documents to Work

Ähnlich wie West Putting Structured Documents to Work (20)

Mehr von National Information Standards Organization (NISO)

Mehr von National Information Standards Organization (NISO) (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

West Putting Structured Documents to Work