 |

Open Source Convention Report
Open Documentation Summit
Monday, July 17
Day 1: Open Documentation Summit
Day 3: Keynotes & Announcements
Day 4: Last Day and Wrap-up
The Open Source
Conference began slowly on Sunday, with lots of people
unpacking, constructing booths, connecting wires, registering for
tutorials, and meeting their friends from last year. The lobbies of the
two conference hotels were full of people lugging the day's
freebies off to their hotel rooms. In the Monterey Conference Center's
Dana Room, however, one group of attendees was already hard at work at
the all-day, O'Reilly-sponsored Open Documentation Summit.
The goal of this meeting was to gather those people who are
interested in finding a way to improve the documentation accompanying open
source software. Some of the issues are
controversial and have generated friction among various camps in the
open source development community and publishers. Representatives from
all the camps were invited to the summit. Lots of open source
documentation groups participated: the Linux Documentation Project,
GNOME, KDE, FreeBSD, BSDI, SourceForge, Samba, OASIS, Los Alamos
National Labs, Python, and Open Content. Naturally, all the O'Reilly
open source and XML editors filled the remaining chairs. Controversy at
the summit, however, was constructive and minimal.
Participants
showed a spirit of cooperation and a desire to
get beyond philosophical differences to solve common problems. As Eric
Raymond, Internet anthropologist, author of
The Cathedral and the
Bazaar, and attendee put it, our mission is to recommend
"small steps, each a reasonable extension to established practice."
The major conclusion reached by attendees was to standardize on
DocBook/XML as the canonical format for open source documentation. The
role of DocBook, however, is to be the storage and exchange format.
Different documentation groups will use it in different ways, but all will
provide
some form of their documents in a standard DocBook format.
The participants did not believe that there was any other practical
solution. The
Free Software Foundation
intends to continue to use TeXinfo, but FSF is working on a way to convert
SGML documents into a TeXinfo format that they can use.
Most commercial documentation projects
use proprietary products like Word or Frame that are just inappropriate
for open source projects. Furthermore, Word, Frame, and other formatting
alternatives lack the expressive richness of DocBook. One of the key
characteristics of any open source solution is that it has to be able
to express every important distinction across many environments,
technologies, formats, and languages. Nik Clayton, who heads the
FreeBSD documentation efforts, noted the many languages into which FreeBDS
documentation is translated. Only DocBook could store sufficient
information to satisfy all those needs.
Nobody ignored the problems inherent in the use of DocBook, however.
Many people complained that its richness also meant that it was highly
complex. Several attendees expressed a desire for a subset of DocBook
that contained only the 25 or so most important tags. Norm Walsh, a
board member of OASIS and the maintainer of the XML version of DocBook
(and, I might add, the co-author of
DocBook: the Definitive
Guide, by O'Reilly & Associates) has tried to create such a
subset, but he believes that even a minimalist set requires about 100 tags.
(Tables are the biggest problem, he said.)
Everyone agreed that a key to good open documentation is to make the
creation and maintenance of it easy, so the complexity of DocBook is a
hurdle. If a potential writer knows lots of good information about an
open source technology, we don't want that person discouraged by having
to learn DocBook. Nik Clayton said that DocBook ought to supply better
style sheet support. Mark Galassi from Los Alamos National Laboratories
disagreed: "People should not have to think about such things," he
said. For the short term, then, many projects may use DocBook behind
the scenes, through conversions, allowing interested authors to submit
their information in whatever format is comfortable. In the long run,
however, as Norm reminded us, "What we need is a good, open source XML
editor."
(There was considerable interest among participants in an XML editor
named Conglomerate.
Aside from the fact that this editor has its own form of style sheets,
it seems to provide a lot of the features that writers need in an XML
environment. We're going to keep our eye on this project.)
XML is replacing SGML. Norm recommended that groups begin using XML
instead of SGML, if they haven't already, and start thinking about
converting existing SGML documents. Most new development, Norm told us,
is taking place with XML. According to Norm, conversion from SGML to
XML ought to be easy for most documents. The one area of concern
involves the use of "marked sections," which XML does not support.
The group also settled on the use of other standard formats: PNG for
bitmapped graphics and SVG for vector graphics.
More interestingly, the group decided to support a set of metadata tags
called the Dublin Core.
These tags provide the
background information that lets projects track the status of
documentation quickly. This initiative tracks information such as the
creator of a file; its title; its most recent revision; its current
maintainer; its subject and related keywords; and so on. It is much
easier for a person or a browser to search this material than the whole
document. Paul Jones, director of MetaLab at the University of North
Carolina, and Dan Mueth, project coordinator of the free software
GNOME Documentation Project,
proposed an
Open Source
Metadata Framework based on the Dublin Core.
Norm Walsh agreed to create the necessary
templates to make it easy to implement these metadata tags into DocBook
documents.
Dan Mueth, of GNOME, hopes that such a set of tags will make it easier to
implement a robust help system on open platforms, one that will be able
to find relevant documentation (help and man pages, FAQs, HOWTOs,
related documentation, and even information sources out on the
Internet. One way to make such searches easier is to have a mechanism
that would let a project "register" its information during
installation. Dan and Eric Bischoff of the KDE
documentation team have agreed to investigate this problem for the
group.
There is much more to say about this eight-hour-long summit meeting,
and I may add some information in my reports later in the week. What
I've noted above are the highlights. The most important conclusion to
draw from this summit, however, is that it is just a beginning. Many
of these individuals met each other for the first time on Sunday. They
have established some goals, started some investigations, and gained
some focus: just the kind of "small steps" that Eric Raymond suggested.
This project is off the ground; I hope that the open source groups that
did not send a representative will get involved after reading this
report.
Frank Willison
Editor-in-Chief, Technical Publishing
O'Reilly & Associates
Return to: Frankly Speaking

|
 |