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, rinch at inficon.com <rinch at inficon.com> 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 art.campbell at gmail.com "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358