my experience and most of my team have not found this to be the case. our
quality system requires us to track errors and rework. Word, unfortunately
wins hands down, in our application.
as for tracking changes, we rarely track more than one round of changes.
kip
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Carrera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 9:32 PM
Subject: Re: [social] no more OO here
kip wrote:
secondly, sure--OO runs fine on my computer too-until i start getting
into 50 - 60 pages of a book with a dozen styles and a bunch of screen
captures. its good for a proposal or a white paper, but not the creation
of a book, which Word does somewhat clumsily but without crashing.
OOoAuthors regularly uses OOo for precisley this. We have 3 full books,
and each chapter is 50 - 60 pages. It works rather well. The main snag is
that if you keep "tracking changes" on for several iterations of the
review process, there is a noticeable slowdown. So you either clear the
changes history or set it to "show" the changes.
OOo has a lot of drawbacks, but large documents like books is one of the
things it actually does very well.
Cheers,
Daniel.
--
/\/`) http://oooauthors.org
/\/_/ http://opendocumentfellowship.org
/\/_/
\/_/ I am not over-weight, I am under-tall.
/
