Re: [xsl] Converting XML into ODT document to print as paper

Subject: Re: [xsl] Converting XML into ODT document to print as paper
From: "Wendell Piez wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:41:17 -0000
+100 Peter.

Word(tm) is an amazing piece of software -- and those who know how to
exploit it can do wondrous things. Note the contingency there. In this
case, "those who know" must include not only individuals, but also teams
and organizations. One person can know something while the team is still
essentially clueless.

To Word Styles, I would like to add Word Outlining to the list of features
that are exploitable. Use these in a disciplined way, with a capable
converter on the back end, and Word can become akin to a semi-structured
editor, not simply producing slop (technical term) as it does most of
the time.

But who does this? And how does one validate (except by eye) that the
headers nest properly? Who defines "nest properly"? And how does one
convince authors to learn and use such a feature, much less respect the
validation and the design constraint it represents?

Cheers, Wendell

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 6:21 AM Peter Flynn peter@xxxxxxxxxxx <
xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 30/09/2020 10:20, Michael Kay mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On 30/09/2020 09:57, Peter Flynn peter@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >> BUTb&all these solutions depend on the Word file using Names Styles
> >> consistently, and that's a human (editorial) requirement too.
> >
> > The first two editions of my book [...] totally relied on authors
> > using a closed/locked/shared template with fixed styles and macros.
> > [...] as the author you were completely constrained to use the fixed
> > styles.
> This can be deeply frustrating for the author, but the publisher
> desperately (and I mean "in desperation") wants to stop the author doing
> a solo run on appearances which will all have to be re-done.
> I used to explain to my academics what happened at the publishers, once
> the final copy of their book/article had been approved and sent in. In
> most cases, all the markup, in whatever language, so carefully and
> painstakingly added by the author (and in some cases by the editor too)
> would be ripped out right down to the bare metal, and the text sent to
> be put into a form their pipeline can accept. In some places this still
> happens, because it's cheaper than trying to fix problems in a system
> they don't have the relevant skills in.
> > You could negotiate changes with the editor (the templates could be
> > fine-tuned for each book if there were special requirements e.g. for
> > running heads) but you couldn't make them unilaterally.
> You were very fortunate that Wrox understood the problem so well, and
> had the time and skills to make the changes.
> > [...] the Wiley process where the [...] final production work,
> > including indexing, was lost when you started work on the next
> > edition.
> Some publishers understand Content, some don't.
> > It's amazing what you can do in Word with the right skill set and
> > with good processes.
> You can definitely publish the entire document using Word and Save
> Asb&PDF but the battle against the software makes it a viable process
> only for those with the right skill set, and it may need a significant
> amount of reinventing of wheels compared with other routes b each of
> which has its own pros and cons.
> Peter

...Wendell Piez... ...wendell -at- nist -dot- gov...

Current Thread