For nearly two decades, standards organisations have debated the best way to create structured XML. Should authors write directly into an XML-based platform? Should XML be generated during the editorial process? Or should it simply be created at the end of production?

Each approach has its strengths, but each also comes with practical challenges. The right answer is rarely determined by technology alone—it depends on the people, processes and publishing ecosystem that surround it.

XML-First: The Ideal... in Theory?

XML-first publishing has long been viewed as the "gold standard" for structured publishing.

In an XML-first workflow, authors work directly within a web-based authoring platform where XML sits at the heart of the system. Every paragraph, table, note and normative reference is created as structured content from the outset.

The advantages are clear.

Content is validated as it is created. Single-source publishing becomes straightforward. Multiple output formats can be generated from the same content, and organisations benefit from having structured XML throughout the document lifecycle.

However, XML-first publishing also introduces significant organisational change.

Authors must learn a completely new authoring environment. Editorial teams often need to adapt long-established workflows. Many platforms require users to work online, limiting flexibility for offline editing. Perhaps most significantly, organisations frequently need substantial development work to recreate the editorial checks, business rules and validation processes that have evolved over many years.

Technology may change quickly, but author behaviour changes much more slowly.

The reality is that most standards authors continue to prefer Microsoft Word. Whether that is the perfect authoring environment is almost beside the point—Word remains deeply embedded in standards development worldwide.

XML-Last: Missing the Opportunity

At the opposite end of the spectrum lies XML-last publishing.

This approach became popular during the early wave of XML adoption. Organisations retained their existing production workflows—typically based around Microsoft Word and desktop publishing—and converted the finished publication into XML afterwards, often using specialist offshore conversion vendors.

While this produced XML, it delivered few of XML's real benefits.

Because XML only appeared after publication, organisations could not validate document structure during editing, automate editorial processes, generate multiple outputs efficiently or exploit structured content throughout the publishing lifecycle.

In effect, XML became another deliverable rather than the foundation of the publishing process.

This approach also introduced additional operational complexity. External conversion suppliers needed to be managed, quality assurance processes became more involved, contracts required regular review, and procurement exercises were often necessary to ensure value for money.

XML-Middle: A Practical Balance

Increasingly, many organisations have adopted what might be described as an XML-middle approach.

Here, authors continue working within Microsoft Word—the environment they already know—while XML is generated progressively throughout the editorial workflow rather than only at the end.

This combines the familiarity of Word with the advantages of structured publishing.

Instead of discovering XML problems after a document has been completed, editors can identify and resolve structural issues as they work. Validation becomes part of the editorial process rather than a separate production activity.

This significantly reduces the effort involved in producing high-quality XML.

How icTools Takes XML-Middle Further

icTools has been designed around this philosophy.

Authors continue working within Microsoft Word, requiring little or no change to established authoring practices.

As editorial processing takes place, icTools constructs standards-compliant STS XML in parallel, validating document structure, metadata, references and business rules throughout the process.

Unlike earlier generations of XML tools, where XML generation often occurred as a final step and troubleshooting could be difficult, icTools allows editors to understand exactly where structural issues occur while they are still working within Word. Problems can be identified, investigated and corrected immediately, making the XML creation process far more transparent and significantly easier to debug.

The result is a smoother editorial workflow, higher-quality XML and much less time spent resolving production issues.

One Solution for Every Document

Another challenge faced by many standards organisations is that no single authoring platform handles every type of document equally well.

Complex legacy publications, heavily formatted documents, adopted standards and externally supplied content often require separate conversion processes. Even organisations using sophisticated XML-first or XML-middle platforms frequently maintain relationships with specialist XML conversion vendors to deal with these exceptions.

This introduces additional costs, supplier management overhead and quality assurance activities, while also requiring periodic procurement exercises to test the market and maintain commercial value.

icTools removes this complexity.

Whether a document has been authored within Word, received from an external organisation or exists as a complex legacy publication, icTools can ingest the content and generate standards-compliant STS XML within the same editorial environment.

Instead of maintaining parallel production processes, organisations can consolidate XML creation into a single workflow, reducing operational overhead while improving consistency and quality.

The Future Isn't About Choosing Sides

The discussion is no longer about whether XML-first, XML-middle or XML-last is universally "best."

The real objective is enabling organisations to create high-quality structured content in the most efficient and sustainable way for their authors, editors and publishing teams.

For many standards organisations, Microsoft Word remains the preferred authoring environment—and is likely to remain so for years to come.

Rather than forcing users into unfamiliar platforms, icTools embraces that reality while delivering the benefits of modern structured publishing. By creating and validating STS XML throughout the editorial process, organisations gain the advantages of XML without disrupting the workflows that already work well.

Ultimately, successful digital transformation is not about changing everything. It is about introducing the right technology at the right point in the workflow, enabling structured content to become a strategic asset without creating unnecessary complexity.

+ Add Comment