Hi Tino,
I get what you are saying. Maybe instead of "print engine" I should use the term "layout engine". In my opinion, the whole EDD concept for formatting XML in FrameMaker is very powerful and accessible. I don't think there is anything quite as good in the XML world, especially if you need quality print and PDF output. Thanks for the feedback. Rick From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Heiko Haida Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 2:11 PM To: Framers Subject: RE: Corporate madness - Adobe software to be subscription only Dear Rick, please allow one note about the "print engine". FrameMaker is still using the old Distiller engine (at least version 10 does). I recently had to switch a workflow from Indesign to FrameMaker and found it annoying that Indesign would produce a valid PDF right away whereas with FrameMaker I have to correct all PDFs in Acrobat to produce PDF/X3 with color profile and valid bleed box. And as transparency is not fully supported via the Distiller engine, the actual PDF/X4 format cannot be produced (the favorite format for one of our printing service companies). So finally, I came to think that not FrameMaker, but Indesign may have one of the best "print engines" - at least more flexible and more up to date than FrameMaker's. Best regards - Tino H. Haida, Berlin Rick Quatro: Here is my suggestion on where to start. I would like a light-weight editor where the user could apply styles, insert tables, images, etc. The styles would be mapped to a schema so that the user could output XML. Then a full copy of FrameMaker could be used as "print engine". You would set up a structured application in full FrameMaker, and import the XML for print, etc. The reasons I favor this approach: 1) FrameMaker is currently the best "print engine" on the market for producing high-quality print/PDF output. 2) With a light-weight editor, you would only need one copy of FrameMaker for output. The rest of the writers/editors could use the light-weight editor. 3) You could easily exchange content with users of other XML editors as long as everyone is using the same schema. 4) This is a realistic "first step" to a FrameMaker replacement. Anything more complex may be too ambitious and not get too far. Rick Quatro Carmen Publishing Inc. 585-283-5045 rick at frameexpert.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.frameusers.com/pipermail/framers/attachments/20130514/b78eb00f/attachment.html>
