RE>>.ssh to .lsi 10/3/97
Many thanks for the comments, it raised some interesting discussion. I agree
that they seem to have nothing in common, and perhaps I misstated what my
systems people were asking for. They weren't looking for a literal one-to-one
comparison, but were looking at WPSGML to be used for certain lower level work
in SGML. They are looking broadly at SGML work in general (regardless of
DTD), and thought WP may be easier to use and more familiar to people for
certain tasks where staff is not intimately familiar with the intricacies of
SGML. Perhaps an analogy is that generating a certain base level of MARC
fields can be manipulated via "fill in the blank" without having to know all
the intricacies of MARC (i.e. boilerplate material or fields that are somewhat
standard in each record). This way a certain level of work can be done with
SGML training, but without having to set up and train staff in a new software
package as well. In short, using a combination of software packages to get
the job done, dependent on the level of the task.
I am not saying I agree with this, and indeed I am somewhat skeptical about
this approach (in fact, my work in WPSGML up to now does not seem to support
this thinking.), but I agreed to evaluate it in this light. Hence the .lsi
question. Anyone game for thoughts on this approach?
NCSU Libraries Special Collections
[log in to unmask]
Date: 10/2/97 5:27 PM
To: Kiel, Paul
From: Encoded Archival Description L
Since .lsi is a proprietary format (and not even ASCII, ugh), it's not
going to be possible to write a filter to convert your other-format style
sheet into it (XSL, DSSSL, .ssh or what have you). Unless you work for
Corel or can get them to tell you how .lsi is specified.
I have some experience creating WordPerfect .lsi files, not for EAD
unfortunately, but for TEI. For power users of WordPerfect (i.e. if you
can put together WordPerfect code with your eyes shut, which is basically
what the user interface asks you to do), it can certainly be done; and
there's a real satisfaction, once you've got solid tagging and a solid
stylesheet to match, in seeing the document you encoded so laboriously
format itself as if by magic. Getting that solid stylesheet will be the
challenge (but isn't getting there half the fun?).
The exercise does, to be sure, dramatize the basic principle of markup
that simplicity of implementation pays off, because any tag usage that
tends towards the baroque is going to lead to problems. WordPerfect's
style sheets, for example, can't test against values of attributes unless
the DTD constrains them; the program can also fall over its feet and
crash if your choreography gets very complex.
For what it's worth, XSL (not yet accepted as a specification) or any
application-independent style specification (such as DSSSL, which is now
an ISO spec) is in principle able to describe print expressions as well as
on-screen. Whether a single style sheet will do as nice a job in the two
media is another question. The first question will be, however, "will
Corel build support for XSL into WordPerfect/SGML," not "can it be done."
Take a look at:
[log in to unmask]
On Wed, 1 Oct 1997, Fox, Michael wrote:
> My sense from reviewing the two is that they have nothing in common.
> The Panorama/Synex stylesheet is itself an SGML document. The language
> of the WordPerfect Layout Designer that generates the .lsi files appears
> to be entirely WordPerfect specific.
> In any event they govern two separate processes- how Panorama displays
> the sgml output in a browser in one case and how WordPerfect outputs an
> sgml document to screen or paper in the other.
> In any event, we can assume that the XSL (extensible style language)
> will superceed application specific stylesheets languages like that
> employed by Panorama for web display but you'll still end up having to
> do the WordPerfect thing if you want to pretty print your documents .
> Michael Fox
> >From: Paul Kiel[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> >Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 1997 2:48 PM
> >To: Multiple recipients of list EAD
> >Subject: .ssh to .lsi
> >Mail*Link(r) SMTP .ssh to .lsi
> >We are currently using (among other things) Author/Editor and Panorama for
> >working with our sgml documents. I was recently asked by my systems people
> >evaluate and compare the capabilities of A/E and Panorama with that of
> >Wordperfect7SGML. In familiarizing myself with the recently installed
> >WP7SGML, I came into contact with its layout editor. My question is: has
> >anyone tried to map an EAD stylesheet (.ssh) into a WP7SGML layout (.lsi)?
> >I'd prefer not to generate an entire layout from scratch if one has already
> >been created. In searching the web, I found the .lgc file, which was
> >extremely helpful, but not an .lsi file.
> >Please feel free to include any comments on this comparison as well.
> >Any help/comments would be most appreciated (and apologies if I have missed
> >posting on this),
> >Paul Kiel
> >Assistant Curator
> >NCSU Libraries Special Collections
> >[log in to unmask]
------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------
Received: by library.lib.ncsu.edu with ADMIN;2 Oct 1997 17:19:32 -0400
Received: from rs8 (rs8.loc.gov [188.8.131.52])
by rs8.loc.gov (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
id RAA63342; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 17:06:56 -0400
Received: from RS8.LOC.GOV by RS8.LOC.GOV (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with
spool id 206024 for [log in to unmask]; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 17:06:15 -0400
Received: from niflheim.rutgers.edu (niflheim.rutgers.edu [184.108.40.206])
rs8.loc.gov (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id RAA156092 for <[log in to unmask]>;
Thu, 2 Oct 1997 17:06:12 -0400
Received: from localhost (piez@localhost) by niflheim.rutgers.edu
(8.6.12+bestmx+oldruq+newsunq/8.6.12) with SMTP id RAA04993 for
<[log in to unmask]>; Thu, 2 Oct 1997 17:06:04 -0400
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 17:06:04 -0400
Reply-To: Encoded Archival Description List <[log in to unmask]>
Sender: Encoded Archival Description List <[log in to unmask]>
From: Wendell Piez <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: .ssh to .lsi
Comments: To: Encoded Archival Description List <[log in to unmask]>
To: Multiple recipients of list EAD <[log in to unmask]>
<[log in to unmask]>