DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Norman Walsh]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

/ Dave Pawson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
| Agree with Norm about exercisesection being quite a mouthful,
| Either his generic section,

I don't think  is available for this use. The sectioning elements
(sect1..5, section, refsect1..3, refsection) form a well-defined hierarchy.

While it would be technically possible to reuse them outside that context,
I think it would be a bad idea. It would, for example, be impossible to limit
the content model of exercise sections independently of the content model
of chapter sections.

Be seeing you,
  norm

- - -- 
Norman Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  | O for a Muse of fire, that would
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | ascend / The brightest heaven of
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | invention, / A kingdom for a
   | stage, princes to act / And
   | monarchs to behold the swelling
   | scene!--William Shakespeare, Henry
   | V
- -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 

iD8DBQE9rhSdOyltUcwYWjsRAkAlAJ9bTKbCQt7Syz38um8JaFmE/HRwQACgj9FN
vOm4GiRAGLXy0pZAG2CDvjc=
=omCy
- -END PGP SIGNATURE-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 

iD8DBQE9rhSiOyltUcwYWjsRAmqeAJ9O2Nc+A24XQwFQvcd5EZWZT2yaKgCdEfAY
A5pOd2AI2Tsd/Ar2n2Wjd08=
=Fur2
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Dave Pawson]

At 15:45 16/10/2002, Togan Muftuoglu wrote:
>* Norman Walsh; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 16 Oct, 2002 wrote:
>>I'm personally quite unhappy with this proposal as it's written. It
>
>me too with what I see below :-)
>
>>adds five fairly general sounding element names (setup, scenario,
>>task, objective, and solution) in a fairly narrow context. Experience
>>suggests that this is too specific; it will work for some people, but
>>it will spawn frequent requests for more flexibility and new
>>special-purpose elements.
>
>Objective in my opionion is a higher level element. 
>
>
>
>
>   
>
> 
>   <
>
>.
>
>
>   ...
>   Setup...
>   Scenario...
>   Task
>  Solution
>
>
>
>How this sound to you ?

Agree with Norm about exercisesection being quite a mouthful,
Either his generic section,
or is there a policy on abbreviating?
   Too short?
then?
regards Davep






>-- 
>
>Togan Muftuoglu

DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[martin . gautier]

Sounds like fair comments.

Given that there are DTDs around that deal specifically with Training & 
Courseware I guess users that opt for Docbook should be content with a 
more generalised approach.

Discussions so far have shown you're right about spawning more requests 
for flexibility (I've seen about 4 models so far) so a more generalised 
approach _would_ be more suitable.

I have to say that in the documents I've created so far, I've been quite 
happy with the existing elements and using a  to 
nest them in. It would, however, be more helpful to allow  
specifically and nesting s seems better than the s I've 
used in the past.

Does it need to be ? Wouldn't just  work too?

Mart

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| There seems to be a rough consensus on this now. What's the next step?

I think we need to see some more explicit description of the semantics
and content models.

| Am Samstag, 12. Oktober 2002 12:13 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
|>  
|>   ...as in sectioninfo...
|>   ...information on what is needed to setup the exercise,
|> student data etc...
|>   ...
|>   
|> ...
|> ...
|>   
|>   
|> ...
|> ...
|>   
|>   ...
|>  

I'm personally quite unhappy with this proposal as it's written. It
adds five fairly general sounding element names (setup, scenario,
task, objective, and solution) in a fairly narrow context. Experience
suggests that this is too specific; it will work for some people, but
it will spawn frequent requests for more flexibility and new
special-purpose elements.

I'd be happier with a structure like this:

  
...
Setup...
Scenario...
Task
   Objective
   Solution

I'm not sure I like the element name "exercisesection" very much, but
you see what I have in mind.

We have had some discussion of adding a floating section-like element,
"topic". If we did that, then we might allow exercises to contain topics.

|> Some method of controlling Stylesheets would be required to enable 
| authors
|> to display s or not depending on the documentation required. 
| For
|> example, a Student version of the document might not contain 
s
|> whereas the Tutor version of the document would contain everything.
|
| That would be really great!

The goal in designing the markup is to make sure that the structure 
contains
enough information to drive the presentation you want.

Be seeing you,
  norm

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Togan Muftuoglu]

* Norman Walsh; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 16 Oct, 2002 wrote:
>| Objective in my opionion is a higher level element. 
>| 
>| 
>| 
>| 
>|  
>|   
>| <
>| 
>
>"Module" has awfully wide and varied connotations. What are you
>suggesting here? How does it relate to the 'exercise' markup discussion?

Well if I remember correctly the whole thread started with the
possibility of creating manuals for the Teacher and the Student. If I am
writing a manual for teaching use then there are modules for each
session. Every module has "objectives " to be covered in the session and
then during the session there are exerceises (Self tests). Once the
module is done then there can be Knowledge Reviews and Quizzes. While
Knowledge Reviews are self study quiz/exam are not. In Performance base
teaching "Objectives" are vital in preparing the Content and the
Questions (for exercies/Knowledge Reviews/Quizzes exams).

So my point is "Objective" should be a higher element ( should not be
nested in Exercise ) Module can be named anything on the top level. For
example Chapter is what I use for Modules currently. By saying "Module"
I was not trying to ask for addition of a new element. 

I just want "Objective" to be a higher element not stuck within the
"exercise" based on my understanding of "Performance Based Learning"

Hope I made myself clear this time

Thanks
-- 

Togan Muftuoglu

DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Norman Walsh]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

/ Togan Muftuoglu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
| * Norman Walsh; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 16 Oct, 2002 wrote:
|>I'm personally quite unhappy with this proposal as it's written. It
|
| me too with what I see below :-)
|
|>adds five fairly general sounding element names (setup, scenario,
|>task, objective, and solution) in a fairly narrow context. Experience
|>suggests that this is too specific; it will work for some people, but
|>it will spawn frequent requests for more flexibility and new
|>special-purpose elements.
|
| Objective in my opionion is a higher level element. 
| 
| 
| 
| 
|  
|   
| <
| 

"Module" has awfully wide and varied connotations. What are you
suggesting here? How does it relate to the 'exercise' markup discussion?

| .
|
| 
| ...
| Setup...
| Scenario...
| Task
|Solution
| 
| 
|
| How this sound to you ?

Be seeing you,
  norm

- -- 
Norman Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  | The last act is bloody, however
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | fine the rest of the play. They
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | throw earth over your head and it
   | is finished for ever.--Pascal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 

iD8DBQE9rYE5OyltUcwYWjsRArZ2AKChDfUFYhQ3adxIW1pnwmdlnniT3QCfd1MB
aavlDm/u8yenSoTdPrZSJKY=
=NSqw
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Togan Muftuoglu]

* Norman Walsh; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 16 Oct, 2002 wrote:
>I'm personally quite unhappy with this proposal as it's written. It

me too with what I see below :-)

>adds five fairly general sounding element names (setup, scenario,
>task, objective, and solution) in a fairly narrow context. Experience
>suggests that this is too specific; it will work for some people, but
>it will spawn frequent requests for more flexibility and new
>special-purpose elements.

Objective in my opionion is a higher level element. 






 
  
<

.


...
Setup...
Scenario...
Task
   Solution



How this sound to you ?



-- 

Togan Muftuoglu

DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Norman Walsh]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| There seems to be a rough consensus on this now. What's the next step?

I think we need to see some more explicit description of the semantics
and content models.

| Am Samstag, 12. Oktober 2002 12:13 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
|>  
|>   ...as in sectioninfo...
|>   ...information on what is needed to setup the exercise,
|> student data etc...
|>   ...
|>   
|> ...
|> ...
|>   
|>   
|> ...
|> ...
|>   
|>   ...
|>  

I'm personally quite unhappy with this proposal as it's written. It
adds five fairly general sounding element names (setup, scenario,
task, objective, and solution) in a fairly narrow context. Experience
suggests that this is too specific; it will work for some people, but
it will spawn frequent requests for more flexibility and new
special-purpose elements.

I'd be happier with a structure like this:

  
...
Setup...
Scenario...
Task
   Objective
   Solution

I'm not sure I like the element name "exercisesection" very much, but
you see what I have in mind.

We have had some discussion of adding a floating section-like element,
"topic". If we did that, then we might allow exercises to contain topics.

|> Some method of controlling Stylesheets would be required to enable 
| authors
|> to display s or not depending on the documentation required. 
| For
|> example, a Student version of the document might not contain s
|> whereas the Tutor version of the document would contain everything.
|
| That would be really great!

The goal in designing the markup is to make sure that the structure contains
enough information to drive the presentation you want.

Be seeing you,
  norm

- -- 
Norman Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  | All the good maxims already exist
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | in the world; we just fail to
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | apply them.--Pascal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 

iD8DBQE9rW4pOyltUcwYWjsRAiweAKClckVkjkuChou/b5DfcmejRXbScgCcD82v
HLU5+oy1j+ir60Oo7Z/PjWc=
=s8Wu
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[martin . gautier]

Norm

There seems to be a rough consensus on this now. What's the next step?

Mart

Am Samstag, 12. Oktober 2002 12:13 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>  
>   ...as in sectioninfo...
>   ...information on what is needed to setup the exercise,
> student data etc...
>   ...
>   
> ...
> ...
>   
>   
> ...
> ...
>   
>   ...
>  

This structure makes complete sense to me. The term  is much better 
than 
. In an  you can also say "Answer the following 
questions" and than just use an OrderedList. And so you can do in the 
corresponding .

>
> Some method of controlling Stylesheets would be required to enable 
authors
> to display s or not depending on the documentation required. 
For
> example, a Student version of the document might not contain s
> whereas the Tutor version of the document would contain everything.

That would be really great!

Joachim

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Togan Muftuoglu]

* Joachim Ziegler; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 12 Oct, 2002 wrote:


This structure makes complete sense to me. The term  is much better than 
. In an  you can also say "Answer the following 
questions" and than just use an OrderedList. And so you can do in the 
corresponding .

I would not use " Answer the following questions"
as this is  what do you want the student/reader to do/behave

objective is a reacheable goal and it should be somewhere in <*_info>
tag.


--

Togan Muftuoglu

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Joachim Ziegler]

Am Samstag, 12. Oktober 2002 12:13 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>  
>   ...as in sectioninfo...
>   ...information on what is needed to setup the exercise,
> student data etc...
>   ...
>   
> ...
> ...
>   
>   
> ...
> ...
>   
>   ...
>  

This structure makes complete sense to me. The term  is much better than 
. In an  you can also say "Answer the following 
questions" and than just use an OrderedList. And so you can do in the 
corresponding .

>
> Some method of controlling Stylesheets would be required to enable authors
> to display s or not depending on the documentation required. For
> example, a Student version of the document might not contain s
> whereas the Tutor version of the document would contain everything.

That would be really great!

Joachim

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[martin . gautier]

> 
>  ...as in sectioninfo...
>  ...information on what is needed to setup the exercise,
> student data etc...
>  ...
>  ...
>  ...
> 
>
...
>> Therefore s and s should be allowed to appear in 
 
>> and , respectively. An  should only be allowed when 
the 
>>  has had a . Unfortunately, this dependency is not 
>> context-free and therefore not expressible in a DTD.

Sure. Assuming that a  must actually be a question and  
is actually an answer to that question ( can do that job). 
Perhaps we should think of these tags at a higher level. ie.  
contains the objective of the exercise - which could be a question or it 
could be a task - whichever way  is interpreted,  would 
contain the solution. Maybe it's as easy as saying the tag names should be 
 and ? 

Actually, thinking about it,  wouldn't work as you'd need it's 
 and  elements seperated...

I don't like this approach, it's too rigid.

Another complication is that an exercise may be more than one objective. 
Subsequent objectives might rely on the success of the previous objective. 
ie.

1. Write a program that outputs "Hello World"
2. Modify the program to make "Hello" blue and "World" red
3. Make the red "World" flash

Perhaps an element structure similar to  (called  here) 
could be used to create:

 
  ...as in sectioninfo...
  ...information on what is needed to setup the exercise, 
student data etc...
  ...
  
...
...
  
  
...
...
  
  ... 
 

Some method of controlling Stylesheets would be required to enable authors 
to display s or not depending on the documentation required. For 
example, a Student version of the document might not contain s 
whereas the Tutor version of the document would contain everything.

Mart

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Dave Pawson]

At 21:18 11/10/2002, Joachim Ziegler wrote:

>An exercise consists of a problem and eventually its solution(s).
>
>In a course, when it comes to an exercise, I might say "Write a program that 
>outputs HELLO WORLD". There is no question/answer involved here.

If I were a student, I'd interpret that as:

Generate a program. 

You may not call it a question, I assure you 99% of students would
take it as exactly that. I'm sure the linguists have a name 
for such as this.




>But a problem may well consist of finding the answer to a given question.

(No matter how its phrases :-)


Regards DaveP.

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Joachim Ziegler]

Am Freitag, 11. Oktober 2002 18:25 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Perhaps these might be useful? (or something similar)...
>
> 
>  ...as in sectioninfo...
>  ...information on what is needed to setup the exercise,
> student data etc...
>  ...
>  ...
>  ...
> 
>


An exercise consists of a problem and eventually its solution(s).

In a course, when it comes to an exercise, I might say "Write a program that 
outputs HELLO WORLD". There is no question/answer involved here.

But a problem may well consist of finding the answer to a given question.

Even if the exercise consists of finding the answer to a question, I do not 
directly ask the question. Instead I say "Find the answer to the following 
question" before.

Therefore s and s should be allowed to appear in  
and , respectively. An  should only be allowed when the 
 has had a . Unfortunately, this dependency is not 
context-free and therefore not expressible in a DTD.

Joachim

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Togan Muftuoglu]

* [EMAIL PROTECTED]; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 11 Oct, 2002 wrote:
>I tend to agree. Such a structure would be useful to me too.

So far yes

>
>Perhaps these might be useful? (or something similar)...

Yes but every lesson (call it module/section whatever) should also have
 performance requirements (objectives). The way I am thinking is you
have objective (perfomance requirement) which is explained in the
following paragraph(s) and then you have exercise ( Self assesment)
which I agree with the format below  

Normally Performance Requirements are also questions (though you can
pharse them as sentences as long as they are measurable and clear yet
this was an old approach)

ie.


What are the commonly used XSLT tools ?
 


bla bla bla


>
>
> ...as in sectioninfo...
> ...information on what is needed to setup the exercise, 
>student data etc...
> ...
> ...
> ...
>


My reasoning is if Docboook tags will be extended to include the above
then the metodlogy of performance based learning should be included (
objectives) also

Hope I did not make it an extra step


-- 

Togan Muftuoglu

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[martin . gautier]

>>  I think I like the idea of containment better than ID/IDREF for
>>  associating exercises and solutions.
>> 
>>  Would this work?
>> 
>>
>> ...
>> ...
>>

I tend to agree. Such a structure would be useful to me too.

Perhaps these might be useful? (or something similar)...


 ...as in sectioninfo...
 ...information on what is needed to setup the exercise, 
student data etc...
 ...
 ...
 ...


The effect of  &  could be built manually using 
 &  etc. if such elements were allowed directly in 
 which I think would help fend off the recent list comments 
regarding bloat...

Mart

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Joachim Ziegler]

Am Freitag, 11. Oktober 2002 18:01 schrieb Norman Walsh:
>
> Would this work?
>
>   
>...
>...
>   
>

I think no. From the tutorial of the Qt GUI library that I've just read:


Try to resize the window. Press the button. If you're running X11, try running 
the program with the -geometry option (e.g. -geometry 100x200+10+20) 


An exercise does not necessarily consist of a question. It can also be a 
request for doing something, especially doing
something with the software or proving some mathematical theorem.

An exercise may have zero, one ore more solutions (for example a standard 
proof and a very clever proof). Strictly speaking, only s can have 
solutions.

Exercises often come in sets, especially at the end of sections.

Joachim

DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Norman Walsh]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

/ Stephan Wiesner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
| Here is an example:
|
| 
| Take a look at the created file Sample.xml. What do you see? Any
| idea what
| happened? Take a look at the Java API to see how it is supposed to
| look.
| 
|
| 
| A hint: Take a look at the output generated by Tomcat. Why do you
| think
| does that error message appear?
| 

I think I like the idea of containment better than ID/IDREF for
associating exercises and solutions.

Would this work?

  
   ...
   ...
  

Be seeing you,
  norm

- -- 
Norman Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  | Ambition, n. An overmastering
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | desire to be vilified by enemies
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | while living and ridiculed by
   | friends when dead.--Ambrose Bierce
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 

iD8DBQE9pvX0OyltUcwYWjsRAp4ZAJ0d90fJnXX1WugdMs6plmNFpUhURACbBW+R
dTJ/YEyV42IJ2uUCIHGYEXc=
=dxbj
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Joachim Ziegler]

Am Freitag, 11. Oktober 2002 17:25 schrieb Stephan Wiesner:
> exercises with the same solution. I then developed a style sheet to
> create documents with the exercises displayed in the text flow and the
> solutions at the end (both linked), or not at all, depending on the
> purpose.

This is exactly what is needed in a class!

1) In the handout you give to your pupils at the beginning of a course, the 
solutions have not to be included because otherwise the pupils will peek at 
it and are prevented from making their own thoughts.

2) But as the teacher, you need a document including the solutions just after 
the exercises they belong to. (You, of course, want to peek.)

3) At the end of the course, the pupils should be handed a copy of all 
solutions to all exercises.

4) If you decide to publish your course as a book, you will want to include 
the solutions in an appendix at the end.

Joachim

RE: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Stephan Wiesner]

Hi, I used to have exercise and solution elements in with a DTD we
developed at my university for Tutorials.
I could write an exercise with or without solution as well as some
exercises with the same solution. I then developed a style sheet to
create documents with the exercises displayed in the text flow and the
solutions at the end (both linked), or not at all, depending on the
purpose. 
Here is an example:


Take a look at the created file Sample.xml. What do you see? Any
idea what
happened? Take a look at the Java API to see how it is supposed to
look.



A hint: Take a look at the output generated by Tomcat. Why do you
think
does that error message appear?



Stephan

> -Original Message-
> From: Norman Walsh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Freitag, 11. Oktober 2002 17:06
> To: Joachim Ziegler
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; DocBook
> Subject: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises
> 
> So far, we have requests for markup for exercises. Is other 
> markup required, or is DocBook perfect except that it lacks 
> and  element?
> 
> What are the functional requirements for the exercise 
> element? How do you want to be able to style it?
> 
> Be seeing you,
>   norm
> 
> 

DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Norman Walsh]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

/ Joachim Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
| Now I want to change to DocBook (as Docbook is a major subject in this course 
| and as the stylesheets are much more sophisticated than mine). I really miss 
| an exercise-tag, but maybe that's not what DocBook was designed for.

Books about software development would seem to be in scope, and books
with exercises and other course material seem entirely reasonable.

Let's explore the design space a little bit...

So far, we have requests for markup for exercises. Is other markup required,
or is DocBook perfect except that it lacks and  element?

What are the functional requirements for the exercise element? How do
you want to be able to style it?

Be seeing you,
  norm

- -- 
Norman Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  | All our foes are mortal.--Valéry
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | 
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee |
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 

iD8DBQE9pujgOyltUcwYWjsRAr9uAJ9JgXBK/42o5vglMwkF0eNLq/2T/gCgrdGj
P0rK4AODdFLrXsRncpnWuO4=
=lgwH
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Michael P. Urban]

Robert P. J. Day wrote
> 
> i've asked before what would be appropriate for a set of exercises
> as well.  i'm using docbook to rewrite a bunch of courseware manuals,
> and there are frequent exercises every few pages for the students to
> test what they've (supposedly) just learned.
> 
> so i'm interested in suggestions as well.
> 
> rday

For whatever it's worth, I marked up the exercises in

 http://greenbooks.theonering.net/ostadan/files/elvish.pdf

as a qandaset, though I wasn't thinking ahead far enough to use
role="exercises" or the like, which would have been more specific.  I
do not see any problems with the semantics of qandaset in such a case;
am I overlooking something?  Note that the concrete presentation of my
document places the exercise answers later, in an appendix.

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Joachim Ziegler]

Am Donnerstag, 10. Oktober 2002 18:50 schrieb Dave Pawson:
> >If DocBook is not the right DTD for writing a book about programming
> >(including exercises), what else in the XML world is? Should I stick with
> >Latex?
>
>  Sounds like a bribe/blackmail Joachim?
>
> I'd suggest stick with latex
>   Or whatever else turns you on.
>
> DaveP.

Sorry, maybe my english is not good enough and I'm confused with some words. 

What I meant was: Should I continue using Latex for high qualitiy output that 
will be printed and published.

Joachim

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Dave Pawson]

At 16:43 10/10/2002, Joachim Ziegler wrote:

>BTW, I've written a book about learning programming. It was coded in Latex 
>(and in German). I'm currently evaluating DocBook as a basis for the second 
>print of this book or for some other book about programming (mainly because I 
>like the ability to output HTML). The more I learn, the less I'm convinced 
>that the current state of the XSL technology will produce a high quality PDF 
>output comparable to Latex. Am I right? 
>If DocBook is not the right DTD for writing a book about programming 
>(including exercises), what else in the XML world is? Should I stick with 
>Latex?

 Sounds like a bribe/blackmail Joachim?

I'd suggest stick with latex
  Or whatever else turns you on.

DaveP.

AW: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Schlienger, Marc]

> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von:  Joachim Ziegler [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Gesendet am:  Donnerstag, 10. Oktober 2002 17:44
> An:   Norman Walsh
> Cc:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]; DocBook
> Betreff:  DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises
> 
> Am Donnerstag, 10. Oktober 2002 14:46 schrieb Norman Walsh:
> >
> > In computer hardware and software documentation? Maybe. Maybe not.
> >
> > Exercises seem more like a teaching tool, an extension for tutorial
> > documentation, perhaps. Still, the question has come up before. I
> > wonder what else fits in that category?
> >
> 
> I often give courses about programming and software technologies. In these
> 
> course, the participants have to do a lot of exercises. Normally I use
> Latex 
> to produce the handouts. 
> 
> My last course was on XML and of course, *this* handout had to be written
> in 
> XML itself in order to demonstrate the power of the technology. I was
> using a 
> simple DTD and stylesheets of my own to produce HTML and PDF.
> 
> Now I want to change to DocBook (as Docbook is a major subject in this
> course 
> and as the stylesheets are much more sophisticated than mine). I really
> miss 
> an exercise-tag, but maybe that's not what DocBook was designed for.
> 
> BTW, I've written a book about learning programming. It was coded in Latex
> 
> (and in German). I'm currently evaluating DocBook as a basis for the
> second 
> print of this book or for some other book about programming (mainly
> because I 
> like the ability to output HTML). The more I learn, the less I'm convinced
> 
> that the current state of the XSL technology will produce a high quality
> PDF 
> output comparable to Latex. Am I right? 
[Schlienger, Marc]  I find this an interesting question and, since
I'm also new to DocBook, I would be pleased to see answers on this subject
from the gurus ;-)

> (I you want to peek at it: www.algorilla.de/PLMP)
> 
> If DocBook is not the right DTD for writing a book about programming 
> (including exercises), what else in the XML world is? Should I stick with 
> Latex?
> 
> Greetings,
> Joachim

DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Joachim Ziegler]

Am Donnerstag, 10. Oktober 2002 14:46 schrieb Norman Walsh:
>
> In computer hardware and software documentation? Maybe. Maybe not.
>
> Exercises seem more like a teaching tool, an extension for tutorial
> documentation, perhaps. Still, the question has come up before. I
> wonder what else fits in that category?
>

I often give courses about programming and software technologies. In these 
course, the participants have to do a lot of exercises. Normally I use Latex 
to produce the handouts. 

My last course was on XML and of course, *this* handout had to be written in 
XML itself in order to demonstrate the power of the technology. I was using a 
simple DTD and stylesheets of my own to produce HTML and PDF.

Now I want to change to DocBook (as Docbook is a major subject in this course 
and as the stylesheets are much more sophisticated than mine). I really miss 
an exercise-tag, but maybe that's not what DocBook was designed for.

BTW, I've written a book about learning programming. It was coded in Latex 
(and in German). I'm currently evaluating DocBook as a basis for the second 
print of this book or for some other book about programming (mainly because I 
like the ability to output HTML). The more I learn, the less I'm convinced 
that the current state of the XSL technology will produce a high quality PDF 
output comparable to Latex. Am I right? 
(I you want to peek at it: www.algorilla.de/PLMP)

If DocBook is not the right DTD for writing a book about programming 
(including exercises), what else in the XML world is? Should I stick with 
Latex?

Greetings,
Joachim

Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, Norman Walsh wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> / Joachim Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
> | Exercises occur much more frequently as a building block than descriptions of 
> | destructors., I think. That's why I was wondering why there is no special tag 
> | for it.
> 
> In computer hardware and software documentation? Maybe. Maybe not.
> 
> Exercises seem more like a teaching tool, an extension for tutorial
> documentation, perhaps. Still, the question has come up before. I
> wonder what else fits in that category?

i've asked before what would be appropriate for a set of exercises
as well.  i'm using docbook to rewrite a bunch of courseware manuals,
and there are frequent exercises every few pages for the students to
test what they've (supposedly) just learned.

so i'm interested in suggestions as well.

rday

DOCBOOK: Re: Markup for exercises

[Norman Walsh]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

/ Joachim Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
| Exercises occur much more frequently as a building block than descriptions of 
| destructors., I think. That's why I was wondering why there is no special tag 
| for it.

In computer hardware and software documentation? Maybe. Maybe not.

Exercises seem more like a teaching tool, an extension for tutorial
documentation, perhaps. Still, the question has come up before. I
wonder what else fits in that category?

Be seeing you,
  norm

- -- 
Norman Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  | 'All is vanity,' saith the
http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/ | Preacher. But if all were only
Chair, DocBook Technical Committee | vanity, who would mind? Alas, it
   | is too often worse than vanity:
   | agony, darkness, death
   | also.--Thomas Hardy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.7 

iD4DBQE9pXa+OyltUcwYWjsRAqBgAJ4zx3/xV1VM3uKvCff/LvgAM59LKQCYkY7P
cdk8RMAsq+Y5P1vH+ddV9w==
=EjmZ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-