Nancy P. Harrison, member of the
DocBook and
DITA Technical Commitees has been one of the original
DocBook developers and is now DITA architect at IBM. She compares
DocBook and
DITA with following words:
- As someone involved with both DITA and DocBook, and having used both, I don't see incompatibility between them. Rather, I see two XML-based architectures developed independently to meet different objectives.
- DocBook was developed to meet the needs of technical book publishers, for information designed around a hierarchical and linear model, hence the 'book' part of the name.
- DITA, on the other hand, was designed around a topic-based, authoring model focused on reuse of information at the topic level.
Her conclusion is a good guide for making decisions between
DocBook and
DITA.
- So, if you're authoring a book, with the book structure that implies, you're probably going to want to use DocBook; it supports a complete processing tool stream for authoring and publishing books in multiple formats.
- If you're authoring topic-based information centers, especially where you need to reuse and reorganize your information for different audiences or information subsets, DITA is a better fit for that; it was designed for that use. And if you have a need to extend the information models to meet your specific purposes, DITA is also designed to enable that, while allowing reuse of your processing stream.
On the question of
DocBook-DITA-Interoperability she writes:
- The DITA community is interested in getting XSLT transforms created between DITA and DocBook, to enable interoperability of content created in either format. With good transforms, there could be some very useful 'hybrid' solutions; for example, maintaining a book's front matter and back matter in DocBook, while populating the body of the book, or even the body of individual chapters, with DITA topics nested and sequenced via a DITA map.
Update: See also Scott Hudson's post on DocBook vs. DITA