Office 2003 Pro as an XML Authoring Application? 41
Saqib Ali asks: "Office 2003 Pro as been out for quite some time now. I was wondering how many large corporations have been to able use it as a XML authoring / modelling application? I have been involved in evaluation of several XML authoring / modelling applications and am planning to evaluate Office 2003 for it's XML authoring capabilities. The scope of my evaluation is limited to capabilities required for authoring technical documentation, preferably in DocBook XML. Is there anything I should keep in mind before starting the evaluation? One feature that I like about Office 2003 is its support for WebDAV. Our homebrewed CMS (Content Management Systems) supports WebDAV, which makes publishing the content a breeze. Except for OpenOffice, I haven't seen any other XML authoring application that has support for WebDAV. Any suggestions?"
XML Spy (Score:2, Informative)
Re:XML Spy (Score:2)
It does *everything*. And well.
Re:XML Spy (Score:2)
Re:XML Spy (Score:1)
It would also have been nice if one of you had mentioned that it is a commercial product, so that I wouldn't have had to waste my time Googling for nothing.
Re:question for the author (Score:5, Informative)
If you can figure that out, I think you'll be able to extrapolate that to XML.
And if you really need an example, take this page you're viewing right now, copy the source to a text editor, remove all tags, save and load in your browser.
Yeah, I know, almost guaranteed to be trolling but ah well, maybe they're not.
Re:question for the author (Score:2)
Re:question for the author (Score:2)
Re:question for the author (Score:2)
Re:question for the author (Score:2)
Re:question for the author (Score:2)
Of course, you could do this with any word processor, but you would end up either with a PDF that looks like a bunch of web pages hacked together or with a web page
Re:question for the author (Score:3)
gus
Re:question for the author (Score:5, Funny)
"<sarcasm>Me tooo. I don't understand these people who use <bold>XML</bold>! It does not add any value to <italics>traditional</italics> ASCII. People are so <red>bloody</red> ignorant. XML is so <dripping>blase</dripping>!!!!</sarcasm>"
That's not a sarcastic response about XML. This is a sarcastic response about XML!
<XML>
<POSTING type=SLASHDOT>
<PARAGRAPH>
<SENTENCE>
<WORD type=ACRONYM>
<CHARACTER set=ASCII>
W
</CHARACTER><CHARACTER set=ASCII>
T
</CHARACTER><CHARACTER set=ASCII>
F
</CHARACTER><CHARACTER set=ASCII>
</WORD>
<PUNCTUATION_MARK type=WORD_SEPARATOR>
%20
</PUNCTUATION_MARK>
<WORD type=PRONOUN>
</CHARACTER><CHARACTER set=ISO-31337>
D
</CHARACTER><CHARACTER set=ISO-31337>
0
</CHARACTER><CHARACTER set=ISO-31337>
0
</CHARACTER><CHARACTER set=ISO-31337>
D
</CHARACTER></WORD>
<PUNCTUATION_MARK type=INTERROGATIVE>
?
</PUNCTUATION_MARK>
</SE
</PARAGRAPH>
</POSTING>
</XML>
nice, but... (Score:2)
Can't you indent?
;-)
BTW, I think something is wrong with the fourth character tag...
Re:question for the author (Score:3, Informative)
It's a lot easier to write and understand programs built that way than the "The account number is between columns 1 and 10 of the card; the customer's first name is between columns 11 and 40,
I know because I've done both for EDI exchange and the former went a lot smoother than the latter.
D
Re:question for the author (Score:3, Informative)
XML is a standard way to mark up information. It is derived from SGML, but designed to be simple for people to read and for developers to write parsers for.
Before XML it was (and still is) common to devise specialised ASCII and binary formats which make no sense unless you have the documentation for the format.
An example I used to work with was chemical data, in which it was common to use position in a line to indicate meaning. In the middle of a large
XML Mind (Score:2, Interesting)
Windows, KDE.. (Score:2)
Re:Windows, KDE.. (Score:2)
I can verify that - I've used KDE's webdav:// and webdavs:// ioslaves to access "folders" on a Microsoft(r) Exchange(r) server before.
The reason I'd hesistate and look long and hard at an MS project for this is standards support. MS's WebDAV/"Web Folders" support appears to have a number of quirks (what a surprise), so it MAY not interoperate properly with anything else. (Someone else has already mentioned the licensing concerns over using MS's schema as well).
(I actually submitted an "Ask Slashdot" yes
Re:Windows, KDE.. (Score:2)
Apparently, any app in XP can use WebDAV since it has been added as a new filesystem driver (mrxdav.sys).
licensing (Score:3, Informative)
Re:licensing (Score:3, Insightful)
I want to use DocBook schema instead. DocBook schema is much better, and has a open license.
XMLMind (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:XMLMind (Score:1)
WebDAV in the OS so all apps... (Score:3, Informative)
Apple Supports WebDav (OS X finder mounts them)
Linux Supports WebDAV (through FileSystem mounting)
so why is this a big deal ?
most Adobe products have WebDAV support there is that old stallwart FrameMaker and their high end versioning system is infact a WebDAV server based...
XML in terms of Docbook can be edited in all editors and some even have things to help you along like formating,preview,block level viewing and colour highlighting
try out xemacs (its pretty nice) or any good editor
john 'confused' jones
p.s. personally I would go with frammaker
Re:WebDAV in the OS so all apps... (Score:3, Informative)
If you ever use Web Folder on Windows, you will quickly realize that the Application needs to support Web Folder/Web DAV as well, to be able to save to that Web Folder.
For e.g. open up Notepad/Wordpad and try to save to a Web Folder on Windows. You WON'T be able to do so. You can cut and paste files into a Web Folder, but t
madness (Score:2)
Jedit? OpenOffice? (Score:2)
Not the same, but close? Jedit is a text editor, but it has extensions that can do the XSLT xforms internally, as well as structure browsers and tag completion. OpenOffice is probably what you want because it has built-in filters to export to DocBook. You can also add your own export filters to xform to whatever schema you want.
I'm not using XML directly. (Score:2)
The documents are CVSed, so that I can claw back time and so that I can have multiple authors without too much worry about them stomping all over one anothers' work; and the publishing system is run automatically every night.
The advantages are significant: reST is easy to rea
BXE (Score:3, Informative)
XML in O2k3 overhyped (Score:1)
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<datafile type='MSWord'> _LOTS_(&**(&_OF_(*&D)(*SDLKJ(*&(*&_BINARY_(*&SD(*
</datafile>
XMetaL supports WebDAV (Score:2)
Office 2003 data loss when exporting to XML (Score:2)
Yes. Office 2003 Pro's XML export is exactly that - an export. According to Microsoft, certain information in
OpenOffice uses XML as its native format, and does not suffer data loss when using XML. If someone hands you an existing
Dear Genius (Score:2)
His authoring tool may allow him to perform edits he can't save in his output file.
The sources for his technical doco may also include Word files.
Xselerator is king for XML+XSLT (Score:1)
http://www.topxml.com/xselerator/default.asp