1 piece . . .

When our congressional debate style meets the list of technical single-sourcing hang ups, watch out. We’ll spend an hour debating a short list of formatting decisions, then when we try to implement them using CSS, some of them don’t work the way we want them, so we have to bring them up again for discussion. This creates the perception (deserved?) that our meetings aren’t efficient, and some cases of shoot the messenger. Example: cross references. To begin, we felt we needed two cross reference types:  one to refer to figure numbers and the other to refer to page numbers of topics. This was after a lengthy, recurring discussion about whether we still wanted to cross reference to figure numbers, which never failed to generate sub-grumblings about whether we had decided to eliminate caption numbering in print (no, we decided to ditch them online!). We hammered out a final total 3 xref subclasses. Our CSS guy promised to format them. This is the point at which management would like this standard carved into our CSS, with the instructions branded into the style guide.
A couple of weeks later I sat down to get my project into shape for producing round two of my Word target. I gave CSS guy a list of style corrections and musings about how to produce better page breaks, yadda yadda. Then I tore into the xrefs for topic page numbers. We wanted something that would act like a hyperlink online and provide both a hyperlink and a page cross reference in Word. This was what we had carefully planned on the white board. After some forum posts and an email to tech support, we learned Flare can’t do that. Yet. So out goes an email from me with the fyi–xrefs will not be replacing hyperlinks in our projects any time soon. No one replied.