Thorsten Scherler wrote: > I will answer in English and to the list, see below why.
Thanks. That has indeed become a topic for the list now. > Actually if you are willing to help, I want to develop an inx-plugin in > forrest that has nothing to do with the plugin code I wrote for the > client. I'm sorry, but we are already way behind our schedule. So this is not really an option at the moment. But just in case one of us decides to go for it some time in the future, let me ask you a few questions: Looking into output for InDesign I found two other options that seemed(!) to be a bit simpler to understand and implement: - Strait XML with a few InDesign-specifics If you translate xdocs to uniquely named xml-elements, you can import these into an InDesign-document and format them with predefined ID-styles automatically. Doing a bit more research I also found ways to import images and tables with very little effort. So if I wanted to implement a simple solution, I'd probably try that route (and actually have to for a client very soon) - RTF Knowing RTF a bit from previous work, I created a basic empty RTF-template that InDesign can import w/o problems. Since RTF is comparatively well documented and InDesign can export a given document as RTF, this to me seems a much easier way to create an advanced output-plugin that can create formatted tables and lots of other options. What are your reasons to go for the totally undocumented and proprietary inx-format instead? Having a look into it, it seemed fairly complex and not exactly self explaining. -- Ferdinand Soethe
