Subject: Re: [xsl] Arguments for XSL From: "Olivier Collioud" <olivier.collioud@xxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 17:09:50 +0200 |
Consider using Adobe FrameMaker 7. Translators will work with full WYSIWYG mode while saving in pure XML. Direct PDF output is also possible. Another WYSIWYN product over XMETAL is ArborText Epic which can be also used to render HTML, PS, PDF or whatever language targeted by xerces/xalan (integrated) and their powerful enhanced TeX engine (via FOSI or XSL-FO extended). I use these products in many projects with great success... but it is not for free ;) >>> mmica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 10/17/02 03:15PM >>> 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, Lee V | Thread | RE: [xsl] Arguments for XSL, sara . mitchell |
RE: [xsl] Arguments for XSL, Mike Ferrando | Date | Re: [xsl] check if a node is empty, Vasu Chakkera |
Month |