Re: Early draft is up

Hi Robin,


>A couple of weeks ago I released "dejats"
>(https://github.com/scienceai/dejats), a JS tool that converts JATS to HTML.

Looks like a sensible tool. Sorry this might be getting off topic, but for this application I’m interested in the technology choice of Javascript over XSLT, if you are able to elaborate.

(We find XSLT quite productive for transformations involving XML inputs)

>There can be a lot of variability in JATS. There's a reason for that:
>it's meant to be a target format, and as such has to adapt to a fair
>amount of variability in input. This is great to get things into, it can
>make it hard to transform out of. In a way, the essential difference
>between JATS and SH is that SH is also a target format but is meant to
>the *final* step format (such that transformation out of it ought not be
>necessary) and to have its metadata extractable through tooling that is
>largely insensitive to structure (RDFa).

I still think there will be a variability in the amount of richness that SH articles will be able to provide. Publishers may or may not have content with a complete or consistent set of semantic information. Silly things like whether addresses are marked up properly, surnames/given-names correctly identified, <mixed-citation> vs <element-citation> use, whether author-supplied references are checked & corrected, citation styles, etc.

Obviously you can force standardisation and a minimal level of compliance, but that works against acceptance by potential users of SH. Could/should SH provide one standard that all publishers meet? Is multi-level compliance like JATS green/blue/orange a consideration? Or an extra level of conformance like JATS4R?

Just throwing some ideas out there which may or may not have been debated, I’m coming in a bit fresh.

Cheers,
Gareth

// Gareth Oakes
// Chief Architect, GPSL
// www.gpsl.co

Received on Sunday, 20 March 2016 22:44:02 UTC