This Authoring DTD comprises a handful of DTD-specific modules that set up Parameter Entity over-rides and uses (by reference) the base modules of the full Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD Suite. The modules of that Suite were developed as part of an effort to create XML applications through which materials on health-related disciplines could be shared and reused electronically. Although the full Suite was developed to support electronic production, the structures should be adequate to support some print production as well. The Suite has been used to construct many DTDs in addition to this one.
Because this is a authoring DTD, thus optimized for creating new content, the DTD is far smaller (fewer elements, and fewer choices in many contexts) than either the Archiving or the Publishing DTDs. Where, in the Archiving DTD, there may have been several ways to express the same information, the goal was to allow only one way in this authoring DTD. It was not the intention to limit the expressive power licensed by this DTD, but rather to limit the meaningless choices that a full interchange DTD needs to make to accommodate conversion from as wide a variety of formats as possible. The philosophy for the Archiving DTD was to accept as many varied forms of many structures as possible unchanged. The philosophy for the Publishing DTD was to accept a wide variety of structures and to regularize those that matter to the archive. The philosophy of this Authoring DTD is to prefer a single structural form, or at least a single style of tagging, whenever possible. Similarly the Archiving and Publishing DTDs allow for formatting such as list numbering and citation references to be preserved. This DTD assumes that such objects will need to be generated as part of production.
This DTD Suite has been written as a series of XML DTD modules that can be combined into a number of different DTDs. The modules are separate physical files that, taken together, define all element structures (such as tables, math, chemistry, paragraphs, sections, figures, footnotes, and reference elements), as well as attributes and entities in the Suite.
Modules in the Suite are primarily intended to group elements for maintenance. There are different kinds of modules. A module may either:
There are many advantages to such a modular approach. The smaller units are written once, maintained in one place, and used in many different DTDs. This makes it much easier to keep lower level structures consistent across document types, while allowing for any real differences that analysis identifies. A DTD for a new function (such as a repository DTD) or a new publication type can be built quickly, since most of the necessary components will already be defined in the DTD Suite. Editorial and production personnel can bring the experience gained on one tagging project directly to the next with very little loss or retraining. Customized software (including authoring, typesetting, and electronic display tools) can be written once, shared among projects, and modified only for real distinctions.
A number of DTDs have already been developed from the modules in the full Archiving and Interchange DTD Suite and more are being developed. The DTDs produced for the National Library of Medicine include:
There is one and only one element in the authoring DTD that is not in the Archiving DTD (although it is in the Publishing DTD): the <nlm-citation> element. This citation model, although loose enough to accommodate the full range of citation types in the NLM Guidelines, is far more prescriptive than the <citation> model of the base Suite. The NLM citation model and the extensive examples of tagged citations provided are intended to encourage the creation of citations according to NLM’s guidelines.
If you want to learn about the DTD Suite in order to write a new DTD or to modify this one:
Parameter Entities are the major mechanism for customizing a DTD or creating a new DTD from the modules in the full Suite. Individual DTDs will be constructed by 1) establishing element and attribute combinations and content models using Parameter Entities in one of the DTD-specific customizing modules and 2) choosing appropriate modules from the Suite that declare the elements needed. For example, if the base DTD contained 6 kinds of lists and 2 table models, a more specific DTD might use a Customize Classes Module to redefine the List Class to name only 3 lists and redefine the Display Class to allow only one table model.
The standard modules to create a customized DTD are: 1) the DTD itself, 2) a module to name its component modules, and 3) as many over-ride modules (class, mix, and/or model) and new elements modules as necessary. Thus, typical modules for a new DTD are:
The basic idea for a new DTD is that all lower-level elements (paragraphs, lists, figures, etc.) will be defined in modules — either the modules of the base DTD Suite or in new DTD-specific modules rather than in the DTD itself. The new DTD will be fairly short and include only definitions of the topmost elements, at least the document element and maybe its children.
Modules are defined (declared) using External Parameter Entities in the Suite’s Module to Name the Modules or in the DTD-specific Module of Modules. Modules are called (referenced) in the DTD proper, in the order needed to define the Parameter Entities in sequence.
This Authoring DTD was written as an example of the new best-practice customization technique. A new variant DTD that follows this plan will probably consist of the following modules:
To show the process, here is a series of instructions for making a new DTD, illustrated by showing how the Authoring DTD was created from the modules of the whole Suite.
PARAMETER ENTITY: SAME FUNCTION, SAME NAME — The Suite modules and initial DTDs have used a series of Parameter Entity naming conventions consistently. While parsing software cannot enforce these Parameter Entity naming or usage conventions, these conventions can make it much easier for a person to know how the content models work and what must be modified to make a DTD change.
CLASSES — Classes are functional groupings of elements used together in an OR group. Each class is named with a Parameter Entity, and all class Parameter Entity names end in the suffix “.class”:
<!ENTITY % list.class "def-list | list">
A class, by definition, should never be made “empty”; the class should be removed from all models where you do not want the class elements included.
MIXES — Mixes are functional OR groups of classes; mixes should never contain element names directly. All mixes must be declared after all classes, since mixes are composed of classes. Mix names have no set suffix; for example, they may end in “-mix” or “-elements”. Content models and content model over-rides use mixes and classes for all OR groups. Only content model sequences are made up of element names directly.
MODEL OVER-RIDES — Parameter Entity mixes for over-riding a content model are of two styles: 1) inline mixes and 2) full content model replacements. These two groupings have been defined and named separately to preserve the mixed-content or element-content nature of the models in DTDs derived from the Suite.
The inline Parameter Entities to be intermingled with character data (#PCDATA) in a mixed content model are named with a suffix “-elements”. For example, “%institution-elements;” would be used in the content model for the element <institution>:
<!ENTITY % institution-elements "| %break.class; | %emphasis.class; | %subsup.class;" > <!ELEMENT institution (#PCDATA %institution-elements;)* >
All inline mixes begin with an OR bar, so that the mix can be removed leaving just character data (#PCDATA):
<!ENTITY % rendition-plus "| %emphasis.class; | %subsup.class;" >
The over-ride of a complete content model will be named with a suffix “-model” and should include the entire content model, including the enclosing parentheses:
<!ENTITY % kwd-group-model "(title?, (%kwd.class;)+ )" > <!ELEMENT kwd-group %kwd-group-model; >
DTD — This Tag Library describes the components for the Authoring DTD. This DTD consists of a base DTD module (delivered as the file articleauthoring.dtd) which calls in all the other modules as External Parameter Entities. Each module specific to this DTD (therefore, not part of the Suite) takes the prefix “articleauthcustom-”.
Each DTD and module has been assigned a unique formal public identifier (fpi). File names are never referenced directly in the comments in the DTD; the file is referred to by the name of the external Parameter Entity, which names the fpi and a system name for the file. The external Parameter Entity has been set to the initial delivery filename.
The individual modules of both the Suite and the DTD (as delivered) have been given DOS/Windows 3-digit suffixes indicating their type:
A module that can be used as the top level of an XML hierarchy. Used for the Authoring DTD top level, articleauthoring.dtd, but also taken unchanged for public DTD modules that have been included in this DTD such as the MathML DTD and the XHTML table model.
A DTD fragment for incorporation into a full DTD. May contain element declarations, entity declarations, etc.
A DTD fragment for incorporation into a full DTD. May contain element declarations, entity declarations, etc. This extension has the same meaning as *.ent and is only used to maintain the extension names dictated by the inclusion of PUBLIC DTD fragments, for example, mathml2-qname-1.mod.
While the DTD cannot dictate graphic file names, the comments do suggest that best practice for naming graphic files in documents tagged according to this DTD Suite would be to limit the names and path names to these characters: letters (both upper and lower case), numbers, underscore, hyphen, and period. All such names will be assumed to be case sensitive. DOS-style file extensions may be used.
Modeling several structures and functions that might appropriately be part of a DTD using this Suite has been delayed until a later version of the Suite. Such components include: