Responding to Deirdre Reagan's original query, Hedley Finger wrote (in small part):
> Deirdre Reagan wrote: > > Does anyone know why FM automatically makes Table captions but not > > Figure captions? > > You have had your answer elsewhere on this list. But, seriously, why > isn't there a figure object that is similar to a one-celled table, which > is a pain to set up. I was thinking about this very idea after I posted my previous message on this thread. I think it would be a great idea if we could treat anchored frames as embedded objects with similar properties to tables. But I do think it would want to be implemented for anchored frames generically rather than just for figures since some documents use anchored frames (or single-cell tables) for things other than illustrations--things like spreadsheet fragments, code listings, and mathematical proofs. (Although if you read the article by a former IBM-er that was cited earlier in this thread you'd learn that we shoudl treat *all* non-text objects as a single class rather than distinguishing tables vs. figures vs. equations, etc.) But what I completely fail to see is why handling figures in single-celled tables is such a "pain to set up". I've designed and used templates that work both ways and I have to say that I don't have a clear preference. Each has advantages and disadvantages. I do know from experience that the single-cell table approach takes significantly more explaining when training new template users, but it's not hard to set up in the template, and only a little harder for writers to use than the paragraph- based approach. -FR _________________________________________________________________ It?s easy to add contacts from Facebook and other social sites through Windows Live? Messenger. Learn how. https://www.invite2messenger.net/im/?source=TXT_EML_WLH_LearnHow
