[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [docbook-apps] anyone have a windows-based publishing infrastructure?
You can use Acrobat for most of those tasks. Commenting, Cut'n paste, Compare etc. /Kenneth -------------------------------------------------------- Kenneth Johansson Technical Documentation Manager Sectra Imtec AB Teknikringen 2 E-mail: ke-joh AT sectra DOT se SE-583 30 Linköping Phone: +46 13 23 52 00 SWEDEN Web: http://www.sectra.se > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Lawrence [mailto:scribe@matrixplus.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 17:03 > To: 'docbook apps list' > > There are several reasons to produce a Word document that > won't "round-trip." > > 1) Other departments can use pieces of the documentation for > their own purposes. For example, the training group can > cut-and-paste sections of the documentation into training > materials. (It is out of the question for those departments > to learn to use XML tools.) > > 2) It provides a way that offsite developers can use Word's > commenting and revision capabilities. This means that we can > email a draft (in Word), a developer can comment on it, and > then email it back. > > Until XML editing tools become as intuitive as Word (don't > hold your breath), most folks in office environments won't > embrace XML as a document solution. Most managers won't > authorize the training or put up with the steep learning curve either. > > Bill > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gisbert Amm [mailto:gia@webde-ag.de] > > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 9:03 AM > > To: 'Bill Lawrence'; 'docbook apps list' > > Subject: RE: [docbook-apps] anyone have a windows-based publishing > > infrastructure? > > > > > The big drawback in the Windows world is that you'll get lots of > folks > > > in the company asking for output as Word documents > instead of PDF or > > > help. I haven't tried it yet, but I'm told that the XMLMind FO > > > processor does a pretty good job of converting FO to RTF. Most of > the > > > other RTF converters (such as JFOR) don't really to a good enough > job. > > > > The approach of Mark Pilgrim > (http://www.diveintopython.org/about.html) > > uses > > the Python Win32 modules and Word itself as a COM object to produce > real > > Word documents. It worked for me (well, a simple test document) but > I've > > found it useless: There is no way back. > > > > Why should I produce a document which can be changed when > there's no > > possibility to get the changes back into my DocBook sources? > > > > Regards, > > Gisbert Amm > > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a post to docbook-apps- > > unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org. > > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a post to > docbook-apps-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org. > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]