I think Mike's on track with his assessment; MIF2Go will give your
more options as far as output goes, and also provide more tuning and
design options within whatever format you choose. However, I think
your goal of "any browser" would point you toward FM 8 for its better
graphics handling and Unicode support.
So my advice would be not to try to cut a corner on your tools and go
with current versions of both FM and MIF2go.
Art
On 8/9/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm using FrameMaker 6.0p405 on a Windows XP Dell 450 workstation.
>
> I've just been asked to supply manuals in HTML. Currently, my deliverable
> is PDF.
>
> I am seriously considering mif2go for producing the HTML.
>
> But, before I invest the time and money, I wondering if FrameMaker 8 with
> its XML output will give me the same result, without mif2go?
>
> The result being manuals that can be read by any web browser, produced
> directly from FrameMaker 8.
>
> Thanks for your insight,
> Richard
>
> _______________________________________________
>
--
Art Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent
and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson
No disclaimers apply.
DoD 358
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com
Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
