Le dimanche 30 octobre 2005 à 20:44 +0100, Giuseppe Bilotta a écrit :

> Ah, excellent example ... too bad it shows what I think is a
> small flaw in your expectations: this kind of featureset is
> to be found in DTP applications, *not* standard
> wordprocessing apps. So, if I were you, I wouldn't keep my
> hopes too high.

I've given up long ago on DTP. Office applications are good enough for
most people, which means DTP is restricted to a little elite, which in
turn drives DTP prices sky-high, which narrows even more the DTP niche.
Even printing houses nowadays accept office documents because refusing
them would significantly hinder their business.

This BTW is one reason you have strict separation of typesetting and
translating people in the real word. Translators work on text flows in
cheap office suites, typesetters have lots of expensive software to
manage illustrations and so on.

Though in practical terms, since the text must go back and forth between
typesetters and writers/translators during the document lifetime,
typesetters are forced to use office formats. If they didn't they'd have
to reconvert every time someone needed to add a paragraph somewhere.

To me it looks like office suites have killed the whole DTP concept
which is now dying a slow depth. Forcing in turn office suites to
implement features needed by former DTP users. Including stuff like what
we are discussing.

Regards,

-- 
Nicolas Mailhot

Reply via email to