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.


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 
  "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent
               and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson
                             No disclaimers apply.
                                     DoD 358

Reply via email to