Microsoft Word, I am breaking up with you
September 4, 2015 7:59 AM Subscribe
After several years writing markup in a text editor, I find myself doing some work further up the editorial chain, where the tool of choice is Word. I hate it.
I hate the way styles can't be applied precisely or enforced globally. I hate all the invisible gremlins you only discover on export. I hate the mess that is Track Changes. I hate how it tends to crash and lose unknown amounts of work. There's no multi-file search and replace, FFS!
I need a new tool. Requirements:
- manuscript can be marked up with tags for design elements (does not need to be associated with any particular formatting)
- can generate files that can be imported into InDesign with markup mapped onto InDesign styles
- clean, intuitive revision control, with ability to accept or reject changes individually or globally
- ability to insert and respond to queries (issue assigning and tracking tools a plus)
- a hosted online service would be best, since multiple out-of-house freelancers and authors will need to review and make changes
- stable, and backed-up in real time
We are not O'Reilly. I doubt I could convince anyone to work in bald XML.
What is the tool of choice for the modern manuscript editor?
I hate the way styles can't be applied precisely or enforced globally. I hate all the invisible gremlins you only discover on export. I hate the mess that is Track Changes. I hate how it tends to crash and lose unknown amounts of work. There's no multi-file search and replace, FFS!
I need a new tool. Requirements:
- manuscript can be marked up with tags for design elements (does not need to be associated with any particular formatting)
- can generate files that can be imported into InDesign with markup mapped onto InDesign styles
- clean, intuitive revision control, with ability to accept or reject changes individually or globally
- ability to insert and respond to queries (issue assigning and tracking tools a plus)
- a hosted online service would be best, since multiple out-of-house freelancers and authors will need to review and make changes
- stable, and backed-up in real time
We are not O'Reilly. I doubt I could convince anyone to work in bald XML.
What is the tool of choice for the modern manuscript editor?
Response by poster: I edit cookbooks. They require heavy structural markup. No equations. Images are handled as callouts, and not set till we get it into InDesign, so no special capacity needed there.
posted by libraryhead at 8:33 AM on September 4, 2015
posted by libraryhead at 8:33 AM on September 4, 2015
fwiw, the O'Reilly authors I know don't use XML, but use AsciiDoc.
Is there a budget? Do you need WYSIWYG? Can you map your required rigid tags exactly onto equivalents in DocBook/AsciiDoc, or TEI? Will there be that one editor who, despite everything, e-mails you Word files no matter what?
Having attempted this sort of thing about 15 years ago, I strongly agree with pantarei70's comment about cultural acceptance.
posted by scruss at 9:07 AM on September 4, 2015
Is there a budget? Do you need WYSIWYG? Can you map your required rigid tags exactly onto equivalents in DocBook/AsciiDoc, or TEI? Will there be that one editor who, despite everything, e-mails you Word files no matter what?
Having attempted this sort of thing about 15 years ago, I strongly agree with pantarei70's comment about cultural acceptance.
posted by scruss at 9:07 AM on September 4, 2015
FrameMaker? Chapters divided into files, can search across all documents, and a million other things.
posted by Melismata at 9:16 AM on September 4, 2015
posted by Melismata at 9:16 AM on September 4, 2015
Best answer: If there were a better tool, all of publishing would be using it in a hot second. Word sucks, but it's the standard because there isn't anything else that does even a mediocre job of tracking changes and allowing in-line comments while also saving in a file format where InDesign can recognize all the formatting.
FWIW I'm under the impression that the most recent versions of Word are substantially more buggy than older ones, so if you can somehow get your hands on something like Office 2008 you may well have a better time of it.
posted by Andrhia at 10:52 AM on September 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
FWIW I'm under the impression that the most recent versions of Word are substantially more buggy than older ones, so if you can somehow get your hands on something like Office 2008 you may well have a better time of it.
posted by Andrhia at 10:52 AM on September 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
Best answer: I'm not sure what you mean when you say you can't change styles globally. I'm pretty sure that you can. Have you considered creating a default template for Word with your own formatting styles? That's what I do and it's so much easier than doing it in every new document. I create a specific kind of document for my job and I set myself and my assistants up with a default template with the styles we need so now there is never any style mismatch that needs to be fixed. Every new file automatically is set to our style.
If you are using Word on a Mac, then yes, the track changes are a disaster. On Windows, it's actually really simple to use and makes it very easy to see what has been removed and what as been added. For some reason, on Macs you can really only get a good view of one or the other: either what was deleted or what was added. It doesn't show both at the same time. But you can accept or reject track changes individually or "globally" whether you're on a Mac or PC.
I understand you are not used to Word, but it is actually a pretty powerful program. (I had a job I was required to use Text Edit for and I hated it.) I'm not sure there is anything better than it out there, so maybe you could learn how to do some of the things you're interested in? I've also never had issues with Word crashing. Again, I wonder if this is a Mac thing. But you can set it to autosave anytime you change something so you won't lose work.
posted by AppleTurnover at 1:10 PM on September 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
If you are using Word on a Mac, then yes, the track changes are a disaster. On Windows, it's actually really simple to use and makes it very easy to see what has been removed and what as been added. For some reason, on Macs you can really only get a good view of one or the other: either what was deleted or what was added. It doesn't show both at the same time. But you can accept or reject track changes individually or "globally" whether you're on a Mac or PC.
I understand you are not used to Word, but it is actually a pretty powerful program. (I had a job I was required to use Text Edit for and I hated it.) I'm not sure there is anything better than it out there, so maybe you could learn how to do some of the things you're interested in? I've also never had issues with Word crashing. Again, I wonder if this is a Mac thing. But you can set it to autosave anytime you change something so you won't lose work.
posted by AppleTurnover at 1:10 PM on September 4, 2015 [1 favorite]
If you want revision control, you could keep a private repository for your project on Github or Bitbucket. While these sites are often used for source code for programming projects, some scientists (bioinformaticists) have been experimenting with using this platform to write and publish research and preprints.
Revision control is built into these sites, and you can store marked-up text. You can add hooks that automatically process markup when updates are posted ("committed"). The processing step can turn markup into a "final" product, like a PDF- or eBook-formatted document.
To edit files and manage updates, you can use whatever program you want that integrates with these sites, even something as basic as a web browser, to as low-level as a terminal session.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 1:21 PM on September 4, 2015
Revision control is built into these sites, and you can store marked-up text. You can add hooks that automatically process markup when updates are posted ("committed"). The processing step can turn markup into a "final" product, like a PDF- or eBook-formatted document.
To edit files and manage updates, you can use whatever program you want that integrates with these sites, even something as basic as a web browser, to as low-level as a terminal session.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 1:21 PM on September 4, 2015
I doubt many cookbook authors have a strong github game and nor would they be excited about adding this skillset to their resume.
In the end this is toughest thing to deal with since I am sure this work deals with tons of low tech skilled people who don't want to be bothered with learning special software or techniques to get their work done. They just want to write recipes. Some vertical industries can get away with specialized tools (see LaTeX in science based academia and Final Draft in film/tv) but in general most people just want to write stuff in Word (or edit numbers in Excel, etc.).
AppleTunover is correct that Word is immensely powerful and flexible. The trick is to lock down what people do with the tool so that they are only using the styles and features you want them to use. That is of course a far harder thing to do.
posted by mmascolino at 1:45 PM on September 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
In the end this is toughest thing to deal with since I am sure this work deals with tons of low tech skilled people who don't want to be bothered with learning special software or techniques to get their work done. They just want to write recipes. Some vertical industries can get away with specialized tools (see LaTeX in science based academia and Final Draft in film/tv) but in general most people just want to write stuff in Word (or edit numbers in Excel, etc.).
AppleTunover is correct that Word is immensely powerful and flexible. The trick is to lock down what people do with the tool so that they are only using the styles and features you want them to use. That is of course a far harder thing to do.
posted by mmascolino at 1:45 PM on September 4, 2015 [2 favorites]
When I worked in book publishing, we did not bother with using Word for anything but initial editing (possibly with some notes in parens for things that needed to be added) and the editors tended to do manual markup/scanning back to the authors during the initial editing process rather than trying to use Word markup. Very few graphics were involved at that stage.
All the actual formatting was done by our graphics team who had already met with the editors to decide on what the book would look like, and they would dump in the text, put in the images, and make a rough. Then the rough InDesign (or at the time, Quark) file went to the production editors for adjustments, a separate readthrough, getting images on the right pages with text, etc. From then on, it stayed in the Quark document till printing.
Not saying your group can move to that system, but I am wondering if some change in your workflow might be more beneficial than trying to find the magically perfect software that interfaces just right with InDesign.
But if I did prize that kind of interface, I'd assume Adobe InCopy would be the place to start looking.
posted by emjaybee at 2:40 PM on September 4, 2015
All the actual formatting was done by our graphics team who had already met with the editors to decide on what the book would look like, and they would dump in the text, put in the images, and make a rough. Then the rough InDesign (or at the time, Quark) file went to the production editors for adjustments, a separate readthrough, getting images on the right pages with text, etc. From then on, it stayed in the Quark document till printing.
Not saying your group can move to that system, but I am wondering if some change in your workflow might be more beneficial than trying to find the magically perfect software that interfaces just right with InDesign.
But if I did prize that kind of interface, I'd assume Adobe InCopy would be the place to start looking.
posted by emjaybee at 2:40 PM on September 4, 2015
I am very late to this, but I just learned about authorea last night so wanted to pop in an mention it. It's aimed towards scholarly work that includes a lot of tables, charts, etc. so may work with your style. Easy for multiple parties to edit and keep track of edits and version history. Text is locked while Person 1 is editing, but Person 2 can edit the paragraph below if needed. It's free to sign up and try.
posted by loolie at 8:12 AM on September 10, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by loolie at 8:12 AM on September 10, 2015 [1 favorite]
This thread is closed to new comments.
I'm not sure there is a single ideal tool for what you want, but you might get better suggestions if you gave us a little more information about the kind of documents you are producing. Are they technical? literary? How long are they? Are there a lot of figures and/or equations?
LaTeX, for example is a tool a lot of people like in technical writing worlds for the straightforward way it handles markup, figures and equations, and imports/exports to other software. BUT there is a huge learning curve there....and if you're not really doing technical writing, it may not be worth it.
In my experience (FWIW) getting a bunch of people on board with a text editing tool is WAY more about culture and comfort than technology. It's a struggle....good luck ;)
posted by pantarei70 at 8:24 AM on September 4, 2015 [1 favorite]