RE: [docbook-apps] anyone have a windows-based publishing infrastructure?

["Bill Lawrence" <scribe at matrixplus dot com>]

True enough for the review side.  However, in our organization Word is
ubiquitous and Acrobat isn't.  The free Acrobat reader doesn't support
those functions.

bill

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kenneth Johansson [mailto:ke-joh@sectra.se]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 4:13 AM
> To: 'Bill Lawrence'; 'docbook apps list'
> 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.
> >
> >



To unsubscribe from this list, send a post to docbook-apps-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org.