Comments interleaved below. --Jean On Sat, 2010-12-04 at 08:40 +0530, Narayan Aras wrote:
> ************************* > Hi Jean, > > @points 1-3: > prediapress is running a successful "Print-on-Demand" business out of > printing books from wikis. > > (see their massive catalog here: http://pediapress.com/books/) > > > Each book is nothing but an exported pdf from wiki. > (In fact, all those exported pdfs are available for download free of cost at > PediaPress site). > > > So professional formatting in exported pdfs may not be an issue. Do these books have many illustrations, tables, and other features, or are they mostly words and/or code samples? Wiki info that is simple can be exported easily and with good results. Wiki info that is not simple can look very amateurish and ugly when exported. If Pediapress can do a good job with the OO/LibO user guides, then that is great. But I'll believe it when I see it. (I don't have time to look at any of the books in their catalog to see if I am wrong.) > > > BTW the default setting of the extension is to export pdfs meant for > black-n-white PRINTING. > > (all text color is stripped, and links are converted to footnotes so that > reader can read them). > > > > However, PediaPress shared with us some 12 tweaks that produce pdf files > meant for reading on screen. > > (The exported pdf has full color text/images, and we can click on its links > to jump to another "marked destination"/URL.) > > > Unfortunately in case of ReNamer, we have a shared server, so those tweaks > could not be used. > > (The changes will affect all other users too.) > > But I do have a list of those config changes, which I can share if people are > interested. > (Basically some parameters are changed in a few Python files at server). > > No harm in trying! :) > > @point-4: > Wiki has built-in DIFF tools to see any version vs any older version. > You can roll back with a single click. > Even changes in images are tracked. I have not seen DIFF tools that give detailed enough change tracking. And rolling back removes ALL the changes made from one time to the next. Usually when checking edits, I find that some need to be accepted and others rejected. If there are tools that allow this, I would like to know. > BTW these discussion pages are not suitable for intensive proofreading (where > multiple people are commenting simultaneously). > Reason: They have to keep a track of what the OTHER critiques are saying. > This is really strenuous, because you have to open the relevant page of the > odt and visualize each comment. > Rather than 10 reviewers pouring through their 10 odt files to track > each-others' comments, using a wiki is far simpler. OOo/LibO has tools to combine all those reviewers' changes into one file. And the day I find more than 1 or 2 people reviewing and commenting on the same document, I will rejoice! --Jean -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] List archive: http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/documentation/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
