[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: XML-appropriate editing data structures

• To: "'mayfair@t...'" <mayfair@t...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: XML-appropriate editing data structures
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 09:58:58 -0500

My bad.  I was thinking of Author/Editor, not XMetal, 
and SoftQuad prior to the buyouts.

The ArborText products had better FOSI support when 
I was part of a production group doing IETM work. A 
major issue that remains, I am told, is that the 
specifications still require both paper and electronic 
output.  Arbotext was better at that but it was a 
complicated system to set up and was a 
production system, not for lone wolves.

len


From: Ari Nordstrom [mailto:mayfair@t...]

On Friday 09 April 2004 22:58, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:


> That's not to say that all editors have to
> support the rigors of technical writing.
> But some do.  That is likely why Arbortext
> is still in business while SoftQuad isn't.


Oh, SoftQuad's still in business. Sort of. They're owned by Blast Radius
these 
days, and XMetaL's alive and well. My personal opinion (as a technical
writer 
and as an XML developer) is that XMetaL is a far better product than 
Arbortext Epic, but I'm aware that Epic has its supporters as well.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: XML-appropriate editing data structures
    • From: Ari Nordström <mayfair@t...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XML Binary Characterization WG public list availabl e
• Next by Date: RE: XML-appropriate editing data structures
• Previous by thread: RE: XML-appropriate editing data structures
• Next by thread: RE: XML-appropriate editing data structures
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread