Subject: RE: [xsl] Arguments for XSL From: "KIENLE, STEVEN C [IT/0200]" <steven.c.kienle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 14:07:42 -0500 |
This may be way off base, but I would think that in this case the use of XML is very justified. This is true specifically because you are specifically looking for the head-office to translate the information, not validate the interface. By sending them the XML, you are letting them focus on the best translation. Of course, the comments others have made about the UI problems with editing text in an XML format would still apply. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Mark Micallef [mailto:mmica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 9:16 AM To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [xsl] Arguments for XSL Hi All, I've spent considerable time setting up an architecture using XML and XSL in order to produce a help-system for one of our software products. I feel using this system is much better than using a WYSIWYG editor because it allows the writer to concentrate on content and not on formatting. Formatting can be done by a different person or at a different time via XSL style-sheets. I've pitched this idea to my manager and he likes it but when we sent the whole package of to our head-office abroad for translation into different languages, they didn't like it. They prefer using a WYSIWYG editor (specifically ROBOHELP). My gut feel is XML is better even tho a WYSIWYG editor allows you to see results immediately without compiling or anything. Does anyone have any thoughts about this? Am I right or wrong? If so, why? Thanks for your help, Mark XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Arguments for XSL, sara . mitchell | Thread | [xsl] check if a node is empty, jeremyf |
RE: [xsl] Need Attributes From A In, Paul Brown | Date | [xsl] Re: Is it possible to know po, evgeniy . strokin |
Month |