Hi Mats, all, we have implemented in our XML CMS (http://www.calenco.com) a feature that allows to do exactly this, and more. Basically that systems offers the users an HTML Web Form of the XML Document. Specific fields, identified by the XML author, or automatically added by the XSLT transformation, are displayed under the form of input fields (text fields, check boxes, etc.). Then all data entered by users on the Web interface is injected back into the XML document. An automatic locking mechanism ensures 2 different people cannot modify the same document part at the same time.
That allows to provide any user with a very easy interface to comment or approve a document, with just a web browser. This feature is not available in the Free version of Calenco, but I'll be glad to discuss of a possible POC with you. Best regards, *NeoDoc* *Camille Bégnis* [email protected] Tél: +33 (0)4.42.52.24.20 5, rue de la Touloubre 13770 Venelles France http://www.neodoc.fr/ On 02/01/2014 21:57, Mats Wichmann wrote: > 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: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
