I would agree, as when I send the files out ? all on the same drive ? 
everything works fine with relative paths.

But when they come back ? still all on the same drive ? they are returned with 
absolute paths.

That?s my dilemma. The relative positions of the files don?t change ? but the 
paths become absolute anyway.

Note that while my version control database is on a network drive, all files 
are checked out to a local drive when they are being worked on, so there is no 
network issue, at least on my end.

Alison

From: Paul Wilbraham [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 10:30 AM
To: Alison Craig; 'framers at lists.frameusers.com'; Harvey, Peggy
Subject: RE: Relative vs. absolute links

Alison
We find that graphics on the same drive as the original files are relative. 
Graphics on a separate drive are absolute.

--Paul
On 27 February 2013 at 18:09 Alison Craig <Alison.Craig at 
ultrasonix.com<mailto:Alison.Craig at ultrasonix.com>> wrote:
I?d love to hear an explanation as I often have the same relative/absolute 
issue with graphics and xrefs when my files are returned from the translators.

Although in my case, everything is done in FM 9 or with the MIF 9 format ? so 
my issue has nothing to do with Frame versioning.

Alison

PS: All FM files used to create the Book are in a single folder with graphics 
in a series of subfolders.

From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com<mailto:framers-bounces at 
lists.frameusers.com> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf 
Of Harvey, Peggy
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 7:41 AM
To: 'framers at lists.frameusers.com'
Subject: Relative vs. absolute links

Hi Framers,

FM 9 p 237 and FM 7 p576

Situation: Converting files between FM 7 and FM 9. All links and file 
references are relative when I start but appear to become absolute when I 
convert either way.

I need to share files with a coworker at another site. I have FM 9 and he has 
FM 7. The files, including the book file, are always all in a single directory 
with a ?Graphics? subdirectory for all graphics.

Here?s the sequence of events:

1) The files were originally in FM 7. (When I inherited them, at least.) I put 
them on a network drive in that form, without converting them to FM 9.
2) My coworker edited the files, then put them back on the network drive so I 
could do some clean up work on them. I moved them to a different network drive 
to do the work.
3) I opened all of the files in FM 9, therefore converting them to FM 9 format. 
I did my cleanup, including fixing the graphics path to the ?Graphics? 
subfolder and fixing cross-reference links that were broken. In retrospect I 
believe cross-references within the same file were okay but cross-references 
between files were all broken.
4) When I finished my work I saved each individual file and the book file in 
MIF 7.0 format. I saved the MIF files in a different folder than the FM 9 files 
and copied the ?Graphics? directory to the same folder as the MIF files.
5) I opened each MIF file and the MIF book file in FM 7, then saved each one in 
.fm (or .book) format.
6) I noticed that the book file seemed to be referring to the the previous 
files ? the FM 9 files with the same names in the different folder. I deleted 
all of the file references and added all of the FM 7 files that I?d just 
created. So the FM 7 book file and individual files were all in the same folder.
6) When I went to generate the book I got an error log that all of the 
cross-references I?d fixed in FM 9 were unresolved again. Upon further 
inspection I discovered all of the graphics had the wrong path, too ? they were 
linked absolutely to the ?Graphics? folder in my FM 9 folder, not to the 
relative ?Graphics? folder I?d copied to the FM 7 folder.

My question: Why are the links and references to files (graphics and 
cross-references) changing from relative to absolute paths when I convert from 
one version to another? At least that?s what seems to be happening, either when 
I open FM 7 files directly in FM 9 or when I go through the MIF to convert from 
FM 9 back to FM 7. Anyone have any insight to this?

FYI: Our final solution is we?re STRONGLY recommending my coworker upgrade to 
FM 9 as soon as possible. I?m hoping he?ll be able to even though Adobe is on 
FM 11 now. I?ve seen the traffic on the list about FM 11; I have no desire to 
update to it at this time so I?m hoping he doesn?t have to, either.

Thanks,

Peggy


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.frameusers.com/pipermail/framers/attachments/20130227/d02f7fb6/attachment.html>

Reply via email to