[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [docbook] document reviewing ideas
Mats, I run a PDF, enabled for commenting, and post the PDF in a central location where reviewers can take turns accessing the file and annotating it. We are also working on a feedback link for HTML output, but are not there yet. I then make the changes in the XML. You say your "internal "customers" are used to reviewing with a wysiwyg tool (namely, Word) so they can markup and comment inline." I think this means that they like a "track changes" capability. If that is the case, what is it exactly that they like about this approach? Do they want the ability to, for example, Accept changes so that they can see how the revisions will look? It would be helpful to know why they like this method and what they want to achieve to determine the best solution. Regards, Norma Emery ________________________________________ From: Mats Wichmann <mats@wichmann.us> Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2014 3:57 PM To: docbook@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [docbook] document reviewing ideas A little backstory here... I inherited a specification document that was written in MS-Word. Although not my preferred format, existing institutional familiarity meant I didn't initially have the option to change. However, when the project evolved and it became clear I'd have to produce a half dozen or more variants of the document, while maintaining large chunks of the content as common text, I went ahead and did the conversion to docbook to maintain some semblance of my sanity. The problem I now have is my existing internal "customers" are used to reviewing with a wysiwyg tool (namely, Word) so they can markup and comment inline. Turns out I haven't had luck generating stuff Word can read directly, but it comes out at least acceptably if you feed it html. However... it doesn't seem ideal to convert to another format for reviewing, then have to "backport" things to the master. This might be a case for the roundtripping stuff (dbk2wordml) but I can't get a usable doc out of that at all. So... asking for advice. What do people typically do when it's time to pass a document around to multiple reviewers? I'm not convinced something like Word is the best answer even there (you end up having to review serially, not in parallel, or you'll go nuts reconciling the comments in multiple different docs, but it's certainly comfortably familiar to folks whose companies run on MS-Office). Is there a "better way" that ties in well with having sources in docbook? -- mats --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: docbook-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org For additional commands, e-mail: docbook-help@lists.oasis-open.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]