[Tex2002ans]

Originally Posted by Hitch

I just don't see how that would expedite editing the e-books. Sure, it would mean that our customers would not have to download an EPUB reader; but then again, that would also mean that they wouldn't have any idea what their e-books look like. At best, this is a mixed result.

This is where I'm confused.

This is how I'm imagining the workflows:

Method A

• Get original file. (DOCX)
• Edit/Proof book. (DOCX)
  
  • Author + Team = Multiple Rounds of proofing.
• Create ebook. (EPUB)

Method B

• Get original file. (DOCX)
• Create ebook. (EPUB)
• Edit/Proof book. (EPUB / EPUB->DOCX)
  
  • Author + Team = Multiple Rounds of proofing.

Method A is what most publishers do.

Method B is what I mostly do.

It's just shifting where the editing stage ultimately slots in.

With Method A, you have:

• The Editor modifying the DOCX + cleaning up most of the author's junk.
• That DOCX gets split into InDesign + EPUB.

With Method B, you have:

• The Converter modifying the DOCX + cleaning the junk.
• That gets in the Editor's hands.
  
  • They're more efficient, because the document is already clean + consistently Styled.

From what I gathered, at the Proofing/Editing stage, you'd want Author+Editing team working together, being able to see the "finalized" text in the browser.

THIS is where the browser-based word processors would slot in—then, you'd get all the mature advantages of word processors NOW:

• Comments
  
  • Marking/Replying
• Tracked Changes
  
  • Accepting/Denying
• Keeping all parties in sync.
• Easy A/B Comparison
• [...]

And while the EPUB->DOCX wouldn't be an exact replica of how the final ebook would look, it could be a "rough approximation".

- - -

With EPUB Annotations, all it would do is create a Method C:

• Get original file. (DOCX)
• Create ebook. (EPUB)
• Edit/Proof book. (EPUB)
  
  • Author + Team = Multiple Rounds of proofing.

I don't see how it would help merge those author-comments + author-changes back into the finalized EPUB that much better over Method B.

- - -

Side Note: Of course, I welcome all Web Annotation tools/enhancements!

Like I wrote in that 2022 thread, the current landscape is a mess! We definitely need more interoperability between all Annotation tools!

- - -

Originally Posted by Hitch

For example, our customers can use the commenting function in Adobe acrobat reader, to leave us edits and comments in their PDFs. Depending upon how clean those comments are, we can also import those same comments into InDesign.

Hmmm, interesting.

So you're telling me a PDF Highlight + PDF Comment can be merged back into the text somehow?

(And... the stuff I explained would be a browser-based DOCX Highlight + DOCX Comment + you'd get Tracked Changes.)

Originally Posted by Hitch

We have other ways, other methods, of importing edits made by customers, into InDesign as well.

Hmmm... We'll definitely have to chat about that some time.

Originally Posted by Hitch

[...] the kind of EPUB that we make into word — don't forget to use number of the EPUB that we make are fairly complex. I do not see them exporting to word readily, easily or usable.

Heh, yeah, I forget... not everybody creates perfectly crisp HTML like me!

Conversion between formats and merging back changes becomes much harder+unstable once you start drifting away from that ideal.

- - -

Side Note: And, as we discussed in those previous threads, every single input->output format/conversion brings its own unique challenges.

- - -

Originally Posted by Hitch

(Dictated to DNS, but not read.)

Not too sure what that means, but okay.