Hi Framers,
The 'Comparing WebWorks versions' thread inspired me to ask this question.

I am producing WWHelp 3.0 help systems to be used in standard browsers 
cross-platform on Mac and Windows. Browsers are Internet Explorer on Windows 
and Safari on the Mac.

The problem is numbered lists in the WebWorks Help template. They show up 
correctly as 1. 2. 3 etc. in Internet Explorer. But Safari apparently 
interprets the WebWorks html code differently, because Safari shows them as 1. 
1. 1.  etc. My programmer colleague tells me that it has to do with the way of 
creating html code back then when WebWorks Publisher Pro 7.0 was released. 
Also, there is another problem with Safari: it cannot open a help system from 
the application, if Safari is already open - it keeps trying, but to no avail. 
If you shut down Safari and press F1 again, it works.

I had planned on upgrading to WebWorks ePublisher Pro - when this invaluable 
list had approved it! - but will this solve the numbered list problem and the 
open problem? And will it work with FM 7.0?

System info:
FM 7.0 (unstructured) on Mac OS 10.3.8 - Safari 1.3.1 (my programmer colleague 
uses 2.03 on Mac OS 10.4)
FM 7.0 (unstructured) and WebWorksPublisher 7.0 on Windows XP, Internet 
Explorer 6.0


-----Original Message-----
From: framers-bounces+npv=esko-graphics....@lists.frameusers.com
[mailto:framers-bounces+npv=esko-graphics.com at lists.frameusers.com]On
Behalf Of Michael M?ller-Hillebrand
Sent: 26. januar 2006 11:21
To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
Cc: Anderson, Eileen
Subject: Re: Comparing WebWorks versions

Hello Eileen,

Just today I was asked by the IT coordinator of a client, why there is
an upgrade of the well-known FrameScript plug-in within just 10 months
after the last version. You know the rule: "Never change a running
system." Why do you want/need to upgrade at all? Are there any problems
with your current setup?

Some thoughts:

Since you are working with Sourcerer you seem to work with structured
documents: Webworks ePublisher (WWeP) does not support structured
documents at the moment.

Unless you want to redesign your WWP conversion templates from scratch
using WWP2003 wouldn't make a big difference compared to version 7,
because the inner workings (a.k.a. Webworks Macro Language) are the same.

WWP7 and WWP2003 share a technology which is in a kind-of end-of-life
phase -- nevertheless I have quite a lot of clients which benefit from
projects with WWP6, WWP7, or WWP2003 (remember: "Never change..."). WWeP
internally uses XML and XSL. You could do the same based on your
structured FM documents: Save the content as XML and use custom XSL
transformations to create HTML. In some situations it might be a better
idea to learn XSL (not simple, but a W3C standard!) instead of WebWorks
Macro Language (also not simple!).

Kind regards,

- Michael

On 26.01.2006 01:40, Anderson, Eileen schrieb/wrote:
> My team is using structured FrameMaker v7.1, Sourcerer v1.11, and
> WebWorks Publisher v7.0.6 to create single-source documents to output
> for different audiences and media (including print, PDF, and HTML).
> Ideally, we'd like to upgrade to the latest version of all software,
> including FrameMaker v7.2 and WebWorks ePublisher Pro. However,
> Sourcerer (which we absolutely rely on) does not yet support FrameMaker
> v7.2.  So for now we'll stick with Frame v7.1.
> Two of our team members are about to learn how to use WebWorks Publisher
> Pro to create and modify templates. (Current team members know only how
> to apply existing WWP templates.) However, at least one vendor I've
> consulted no longer offers training on WebWorks Publisher Pro version 7;
> it's simply too old. I'm wondering if we should upgrade to WebWorks
> Publisher Pro 2003 or WebWorks ePublisher Pro.
> There is one downside to upgrading: While our desktop publishers will
> have WebWorks Publisher Pro, our authors will have only the WebWorks
> Standard v7 that is included with purchase of FrameMaker. We previously
> found that if we created templates in WWP Pro 2003, authors using WWP
> Standard 7 couldn't output HTML using those templates. (That's why we
> "downgraded" our WebWorks Pro licenses to version 7.) Having authors
> capable of outputting their own HTML is a luxury for us, but not an
> absolute need.
> So, Framers, this is where I'd like to benefit from your experience and
> advice.
> - Have you used WebWorks ePublisher Pro? Do you find it offers
> significant enhancements over prior versions of WebWorks Publisher Pro?
> Is it compatible with FrameMaker version 7.1?
> - Do you see a significant advantage in using WebWorks Publisher Pro
> 2003 as compared to WebWorks Publisher Pro version 7?
> - Do you have other thoughts on our situation or lessons learned from
> your experiences with different WebWorks Publisher versions?
> Thanks!
> - Eileen Anderson
> Manager of Curriculum Editing & Desktop Publishing
> T-Mobile Customer Care Learning & Development
> eileen.anderson at t-mobile.com

Michael M?ller-Hillebrand          http://cap-studio.de/
WebWorks Publisher Support & Info  http://wwp-support.info/
  Please make sure to send follow-up questions to the list.
  Contact me directly with business inquiries or comments.

You are currently subscribed to Framers as npv at esko-graphics.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
or visit 

Send administrative questions to lisa at frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Reply via email to