1. Tracking Changes to JATS XML in an Online Proofing System

2. 22 Dartmouth Journal Services

3. 33 Content Services for STM Publishers Peer ReviewEditorialXML-FirstComposition Electronic Deliverables Online Hosting Mobile Apps Print

4. 44 The Sheridan Group (TSG) Hunt Valley, MD Technology Lab (TSG) Hunt Valley, MD Dartmouth Journal Services (DJS) Waterbury, Vermont Dartmouth Printing Company (DPC) Hanover, New Hampshire The Sheridan Press (TSP) Hanover, Pennsylvania Sheridan Books (SBI) Ann Arbor and Chelsea, Michigan SBI DJS TSP TSG DPC The Sheridan Group Companies

5. 55  If the online journal is the journal of record, then how come almost all production workflows only provide PDF proofs?  PDFs cannot incorporate, without significant cost, the elements of tomorrow’s scientific articles; (i.e., multi-media content, data linking, semantic enrichment, supplemental material)  HTML presentation is the future of science articles, even if PDF is the file of record today. HTML5 alone offers an expanding array of features that will improve presentation in the browser (i.e., MathML support, offline caching, native browser support for multi-media, etc.) The Question

6. 66 The PDF-Based Workflow Correction Cycle

7. 77 Project Team Charles O’Connor Workflow Automation Specialist ArticleExpress Project Manager Mike Hepp Director, Technology Strategy ArticleExpress Project Leader Antony Gnanapiragasam Workflow Automation Specialist ArticleExpress System Architect Tina Fleischer Technical Support Specialist ArticleExpress Quality Assurance

8. 88 Web-based Proofing, Editing, and Review System and Automated XML-Driven Composition The Solution

9. 99 Online XML Editing Correction Cycle

10. 10 Building Support for the Idea DJS

11. 11 Collaborative Online Editing Environment Production Team Production Editor Publisher Corresponding Author Co-Authors

12. 12 For a browser-based XML article proofing system to function well in a journal publishing workflow, it must have a comprehensive change tracking capability:  Multiple users interacting with the system and document in the same workflow step  The ability to act upon the changes, regardless of what role/actor made them and regardless of what order they were inserted  Allow editors to accept or reject changes without breaking the underlying XML The Technical Challenge for Track Changes

13. 13 Underlying XML Editing Environment

14. 14 Although the XML editing environment choice was important, there were limitations that needed to be overcome through custom development:  No easy way for authors to add more complex XML structures  Change tracking – limited to insertions and deletions only XML Editing Limitations

15. 15 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 XML 1XML 2 XML 4 XML 6XML 5XML 3 Sequential Editing

16. 16 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 XML 1 XML 4 XML 8 Parallel Editing 8 8 9 9 XML 2 XML 6 XML 5 XML 3 XML 9 Merge XML 7

17. 17 The Longest Common Subsequence Problem  We may get an accurate representation of the difference between the original and the edited versions of the text, but it may not tell us what the author actually did. Limitations of XML Differencing Approach

18. 18 Before: “I say cheese to you” After: “I say oh pleeze to you” Diff: “I say coh pleesze to you” Limitations of XML Differencing Approach

19. 19 Loss of Granularity  Attempting to overcome this problem by applying a cleanup parameter or otherwise grouping changes can lead to a loss in the granularity of changes.  Changes within changes will not be marked individually as changes, which is a problem if they should be dealt with discretely. Limitations of XML Differencing Approach

20. 20 Loss of Granularity Before hello world After hello silly italic world Limitations of XML Differencing Approach

21. 21 Custom Elements  Use information from event handlers in SDL LiveContent Create to create custom track changes elements and attributes.  Edits can be performed in a number of ways we needed different elements to capture these edits Custom Elements

22. 22 Custom Elements

23. 23 Custom Elements  Example of formatting. Custom Elements

24. 24 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 XML 1 XML 2 XML 4 XML 5XML 3 Random Access Sequential Editing 7 7 8 8 9 9

25. 25 Solved by designing and developing:  Comprehensive change tracking  Rule engine that protects the structure of the XML by governing the order of acceptance and rejection of edits  Denormalization of nested elements to granularly expose all edits Change Tracking Solution

26. 26 Rule Engine for Accepting/Rejecting Changes Format Delete Insert

27. 27 ProofExpress – Review Mode

28. 28 Problem: Order of decision making…  If the system does not enforce an order of decision making, then the process may break the XML. Rule Engine for Accepting/Rejecting Changes

29. 29 Order of Decision Making Solution

30. 30 XML Denormalization  For the accept/reject rule engine to work properly, the track changes tool must show how changed nodes are nested within each other.  As per the rule engine, insertions and deletions should always be the outside changes when they occur in relation to changes in formatting. XML Denormalization

31. 31 XML Denormalization  Formatting nodes XML Denormalization

32. 32 ArticleExpress Demo

33. Questions?