Re: [xml-dev] PLOS blog about relative merits of XML (JATS) andHTML in w

[Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org>]

On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 22:43 +0100, Peter Flynn wrote:
> On 06/10/2013 11:04 PM, Sheila M. Morrissey wrote:
> [...]
> > Her query If XML is being used as an interchange format only, what
> > do we gain from moving the XML piece of the workflow any further
> > upstream from final delivery?
> 
> The canonical answer is usually the ability to service multiple delivery
> formats from a single master.
> 
> Plus the preservability of a plaintext self-describing file format (if
> the document is regarded as worth preserving for posterity).
> 
> But publishers don't usually see either of these as a source of revenue.

Currently a lot of publishers edit in MS Word, convert to InDesign (or
Quark), make PDF for print, then take the print file and try to turn it
into an eBook; Amazon will even use OCR if necessary.

Some other publishers prefer to go to XML "early" (e.g. right after the
editing in Word, or sometimes pushing it all the way to the authors by
supplying tools), use an XML-based formatter (e.g. RenderX or Antenna
House Publisher) to generate print, use the same XML file to generate
ebooks/epub in multiple formats, have a higher quality product for a
lower cost, and get to market with the ebook days, weeks or even months
sooner.

Liam

-- 
Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/
Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/
Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org freenode/#xml