From what I have been able to deduce from the documentation for version 3.1,
the Word to XML transformation works like the old SGML Author for Word
software in that one associates different Word styles with comparable XML
elements. With XMetaL, a VBscript executes the transformation.
When we used SGML Author, we had to set up a series of Word styles with
names like BiogHistHead and BiogHistPara which were mapped in the software
to the EAD elements archdesc>>bioghist>>head and archdesc>>bioghist>>p
through an interactive mapping table. That software was complicated to
program and somewhat limited in its functionality.
From: Ellen Zazzarino [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 1:35 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: XMetaL 4 vs. XMetaL 3
We recently purchased the XMETAL 3. I would appreciate it if you could
send the replies to me or post on the Listserv.
I have also been trying to figure out how to incorporate the template
that converts a MSword document to XML (it comes with version 3 ) with
the EAD codes. I've been working on this but I can't seem to get it to
work. Have you used this feature? If so, any advise is welcome.
Senior Archivist/ Librarian
Western History/ Genealogy Dept.
Denver Public Library
>>> [log in to unmask] 04/21/03 11:18AM >>>
In our institution we're currently using XMetaL 3 to encode our finding
aids. Thanks to a grant we'll be purchasing a new computer and new
software, and we're thinking of buying XMetaL 4. I've checked the
Softquad website to see the differences between the two versions, but
I'm a little unclear on how these versions differ.
Has anyone worked with both versions, and would you be willing to share
your opinions and experiences on using version 4 versus version 3?
thanks in advance,
Alison Hinderliter - [log in to unmask]
The Newberry Library
60 W. Walton St.
Chicago, IL 60610-7324