Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Common Word Processing Format
 Mostly agree but I have to ask: Why would I need XForms for a word processing program? Again: how useful is it to discriminate between hypermedia and word processing formats? This digs to the heart of a debate that has raged in publishing and hypertext systems from the earliest days. If you dare to do less and you want fewer XML languages, you have to solve this. Else, there is no inflection point for OpenDoc and Word Doc remains the standard by de facto adoption. BTW: HTML as noted by Koberg's URI to Bos and Lie et al is as you note, a fine printing format. Is that all a word processing system has to be in a common core? What I am on about here is what is the common core? Else, what other specs and standards should be considered? Is this really just OpenDoc vs MSDoc, or is this about Web 2.0 (bleaach) generation applications that rely on standard components delivered just-in-time such that the inflection point is about neither of these wp formats but about the next generation of software in which there is no useful discrimination between the desktop apps and web apps other than the communications plumbing and that comes gratis. Design here. Legal politics elsewhere. len From: Nathan Young -X (natyoung - Artizen at Cisco) [mailto:natyoung@c...] If we're talking about a document format to replace MS word documents, we need much more than XHTML. XHTML holds the content of the document and provides (some) semantic information about that content. To replicate what a word doc can do and does do for most users, you have to also specify how it's going to display and probably provide some information to the application about how the editing experience should be presented. So maybe XHTML + CSS + XForms could do it. I'm not sure what I would gain by limiting myself to XHTML. Simple documents are fine in XHTML, possibly with some number of (possibly partially intersecting) embedded microformat conventions. But to use XHTML to represent the semantics of a complex document is burdensome compared to a purpose built schema. I'm delighted with CSS. There are definitely times when display requirements can't be satisfied and I need an intermediate XSL transformation as well, but that's usually when the final output isn't known at authoring time, and no word processing document format that I know of deals with the unknown any better. Put all this together and my ability to use XML in the CMS and transform it for display is something I'm quite happy with. The really big barrier right now is my inability to send XML out to users and have them edit it in a way that grants both of us sanity. XForms is exciting but incomplete and poorly supported. If anyone has an end-user (read: "good looking and dummy proof") authoring solution they are happy with let me know because I'm super motivated to find something. 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
