Re: [xsl] Arguments for XSL

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

  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,

Thanks for your help,


 XSL-List info and archive: 

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread