Folks, I have no intention of getting into a pissing match with you all. If you feel that FM tables works well for you and meets your needs, excellent. If you have the budget to buy a plethora of plug-ins, also excellent.
I don't know anything about your processes, procedures, needs, or budgets. I feel no compunction to tell you that your perceptions are wrong or to take you to task publicly and make you justify your perceptions. Conversely, you don't know my processes, procedures, needs, and budget either. All I'm saying is that in my experience, I have not found the table feature in FM robust enough for me. You're allowed to disagree with me. I'm okay with that. Different opinions are a good thing in a forum because that's what a forum is for. However, your opinion is an opinion, and not THE answer. My opinion isn't THE answer either...it's just my opinion. Nadine --- On Fri, 2/12/10, Fred Ridder <docudoc at hotmail.com> wrote: > From: Fred Ridder <docudoc at hotmail.com> > Subject: RE: Converting Rows to Headers > To: generic668 at yahoo.ca, "Yves Barbion" <yves.barbion at gmail.com> > Cc: framers at lists.frameusers.com > Date: Friday, February 12, 2010, 8:57 AM > > > > > > So what tool(s) do you think does a better job with tables > than FrameMaker? I've used a lot of different tools over > the years, and I find the FrameMaker implementation to be > the best one I've worked with, and one of the few that > actually handles a table as a self-contained object and not > just a bunch of paragraphs with boxes around them. > As to plug-ins, I think the FrameMaker model of providing > robust, predictable core functionality and leaving > specialized to plug-ins is vastly preferable to the > Microsoft philosophy of building every conceivable feature > into the application itself. In addition to?forcing all > users to work around featurees they?don't need and > will never use, it generally seems to lead to > slower?performance and much lower stability.? It > should also be noted that Adobe?embraces the > third-party plug-in model for several of their products, > including their premier Photoshop and InDesign products. > > I have been a power user of something like 15 different > versions of Microsoft Word on Macintosh, DOS, and Windows > platforms over they years, and I currently use both Word > (2007) and FrameMaker on a daily basis, and?the > decision of which one to take with me to the proverbial > desert island would take me about a millisecond.? > -Fred Ridder > > > Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 07:21:27 -0500 > > From: generic668 at yahoo.ca > > To: yves.barbion at gmail.com > > Subject: Re: Converting Rows to Headers > > CC: framers at lists.frameusers.com > > > > *shrug* > > > > Different users have different needs, and FM tables > don't meet mine. > > > > As to the OP's op, we shouldn't have to have a > multitude of plug-ins for > > FM. It should work the way it should work. > > > > Nadine > > >
