Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
At 5:31 PM -0400 5/18/07, Ann Zdunczyk wrote: It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books are going away and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, plan to continue reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a screen, I do that all day. It is much easier to read a book at the beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not listen to books on tape, I READ. I love the SMELL of a book. I love the feel of a book. I like FrameMaker. I know FrameMaker. I plan to use it until it no longer works on ANY of the machines I have. I still use FrameMaker on my MAC. I have been using FrameMaker since 3.0 back in the early 90's (when it was Frame Technologies). I use it as it is. I'll ditto that. Dead tree based publishing isn't likely to go away any time soon. - web ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as a device that you can comfortably and safely use in the tub is concerned, I don't think that paper will be the delivery method of the future. Its estimated that 40% of the US adult population is non-literate, which means they dont read books or newspapers. This has been accompanied by a rapid decline in the ability of college students to write a half-way decent paragraph in English. The California State College system, the largest in the nation, takes almost any applicant who got through high-school degree with half-way decent grades. But about 40% of its first year students are not capable of doing college-level work, and thus their first year is dominated by remedial classes in English, Math and other subjects they should have mastered in high school. These declines all coincide with the growth of the internet, and the shift from obtaining knowledge from paper books to learning from feeble snippets of on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those who are at least competent in the English language, consists mainly of opinions unsupported by any factual basis. When you read tomes from the 1990s extolling the promise of hypertext to change the way people think and use information, (I recommend the Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), you begin to realize that its promise was still-born. The hypertext pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of link types that would create hypertexts which were true searchable mazes Frame Technology, beginning in FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link types which would have realized that original vision. When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried out that vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker link types in PDF. It failed to do so. And so, the HTML standard, with only the most primitive hypertext link type, became the standard. There was some hope that the XML standard would have rich linking capabilities. It added a few additional link types, but nowhere near enough to realize the original promise of hypertext. The result is that most online help documents are shovelware. I wrote an article about that, Thoughts About On-Line Help, about 6 years ago. Its still available at: http://www.microtype.com/resources/articles/Oldocs_DE.pdf Although I would probably add some additional concepts and ideas if I wrote that article today, I still stand by most of whats stated there. In particular, I stand by my statements in that article about the many advantages of paper books (or PDFs which faithfully replicate the format and layout of well-designed paper books). Getting back to what I state in the first two paragraphs above, I maintain that the ability to acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject is a discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no doubt that well-written, well-organized paper books, particularly on difficult subjects, will continue to be the best way to acquire real, in-depth knowledge of a subject, and subsequently serve its owner as a valuable reference source. If the internet (and other vehicles of on-line content) continues to serve mainly to encourage an undiscipplined pseudo-approach to real learning, it will remain a major cause of rising non-literacy. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: PDF Content reuse with Frame + DITA?
Hi Gyanesh... Each time you regenerate your book, the conditional settings in effect, will define the content shown in the generated lists (Index and TOC specifically). The index is generated from index markers, and they will be used (or not) depending on their conditional tagging. This isn't too bad if the index markers are within a paragraph that is tagged with a condition, but if you just want to conditionalize words within a marker, that's a bit tougher .. in general you'd need to create duplicate markers with different text, and conditionalize each marker accordingly. However this is difficult to maintain since it's very hard to just tag a single marker with a specific condition. There are a couple of plugins that help with conditionalized or variable content in a marker (MarkerTools and Index Tools Pro .. links below). It's a good practice to avoid conditional content within index entries .. it's one thing to include/exclude a marker in a specific output, but if you start messing with words within a marker, you'll go nuts. MarkerTools - http://www.leximation.com/tools/info/markertools.php Index Tools Pro - http://www.siliconprairiesoftware.com/Products.html The TOC is generated from the paragraph styles (headings) that you specify, and it will only pull in the content that is in a show state. As with markers, it's good to avoid conditionalizing specific words in headings .. it can be done but you have to be careful to conditionalize the spaces properly so you don't end up with too few or too many. Variables will show/hide along with the surrounding content that is tagged in a certain way. If you want to change the definition of a variable for different output types, you can change the values in a template and import that into all files into the book .. or use our BookVars plugin to swap the definitions as needed. BookVars - http://www.leximation.com/tools/info/bookvars.php If you're using DITA, depending on the method you're using to create the PDFs (through Frame or through the DITA-OT), you can still use conditional tagging, or you can use the filtering attributes on each element. With DITA, you'd typically set the filtering attributes on elements to determine the product, audience, etc. and when you generate your output, you'd filter out the elements that don't apply to that version (similar to using conditional tags). There's a great plugin (ABCM) for Frame that lets you apply conditions (and thus hide/show content) based on attribute values. This is a must if you're producing output through Frame and want to use attribute values to do the filtering (it's free too!). (If you're generating your output through the XSLT transformations in the DITA-OT, you'd do this filtering using a ditavals file.) ABCM - http://www.weststreetconsulting.com/WSC_ABCM.htm Good luck! ...scott Scott Prentice Leximation, Inc. www.leximation.com +1.415.485.1892 Gyanesh Talwar wrote: Thanks Scott! I think i will settle for show/hide. And if I do, is there a way to handle index/toc/variables (such as name of the book) automatically? Or do I do that manually? And let's say I have to implement DITA. Can I still publish two different PDFs selectively? And how will I carry out the selection of text in Structured Frame? Thanks again! Gyanesh On 5/18/07, Scott Prentice [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Gyanesh... If your main goal is to publish two different sets of content from the same FM source files, I'd think that your best bet is to just use conditional text (show/hide) in unstructured FM files. There are probably benefits you could gain by moving to structure and/or DITA (and it can certainly be done with structure/DITA), but for what you're talking about, conditional text is really all you need. Just create two conditional tags and apply those tags to the content that is only for one product or the other (just don't overlap conditions) .. anything that is common to both would be left untagged. Use the conditional text show/hide settings to show one and hide the other, then generate your PDF. Cheers! ...scott Gyanesh Talwar wrote: Hello Framers, (Frame 7.2b144) For my product, I have 2 guides with similar content across different chapters. Can I publish two different PDFs from the same source (with selective content obviously). - How will this be done? Using topic IDs? - Is Show/hide a better option for this than Structured Frame? - Is it viable to use DITA for this? Some other EDD ...or custome made? TIA, Gyanesh ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: PDF Content reuse with Frame + DITA?
On Sun, 20 May 2007 13:30:45 -0700, Scott Prentice [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's a good practice to avoid conditional content within index entries .. it's one thing to include/exclude a marker in a specific output, but if you start messing with words within a marker, you'll go nuts. It's not only good practice, it's the law. ;-) Frame *implements* conditional text using markers. So it's flat-out impossible to conditionalize *within* a marker. As Scott says, the closest you can get to that is: you'd need to create duplicate markers with different text, and conditionalize each marker accordingly. However this is difficult to maintain ... -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.omsys.com/ ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: PDF Content reuse with Frame + DITA?
Thanks Jeremy .. good point! Now that I read what I wrote, I can see how it could be misunderstood. I meant that even if you do duplicate and conditionalize markers just to change one word in that marker, it will become a mess to manage. :) The Index Tools Pro plugin claims to provide for conditional index entries .. I'm not sure what that means exactly, but it may perhaps make the process of conditionalizing individual markers easier. Our plugin, MarkerTools, lets you insert a custom building block into markers which maps to variables that are defined in your document .. in essence allowing you to have variables within markers (not possible without the plugin). This can give you a type of conditional control within a marker (especially when used in conjunction with BookVars). ...scott Jeremy H. Griffith wrote: On Sun, 20 May 2007 13:30:45 -0700, Scott Prentice wrote: It's a good practice to avoid conditional content within index entries .. it's one thing to include/exclude a marker in a specific output, but if you start messing with words within a marker, you'll go nuts. It's not only good practice, it's the law. ;-) Frame *implements* conditional text using markers. So it's flat-out impossible to conditionalize *within* a marker. As Scott says, the closest you can get to that is: you'd need to create duplicate markers with different text, and conditionalize each marker accordingly. However this is difficult to maintain ... -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.omsys.com/ ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Overall, I agree with Dan's point on how much opportunity for a rich electronic communications environment has been overlooked. On the other hand, who among us can be sure that there's no alternative rich communications universe embedded in the shorthand languages of IM and rap? Where's the Rosetta Stone that can cross-translate among Standard English, common idiomatic English, generally-accepted slang-lish, blended-with-various-ethnic-based-languages English, etc? Some people can communicate better than others. Woody Guthrie summarized the main themes and meanings of the film of Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath in one night, in language that almost anyone can read and grasp. It probably would survive the cryptic notation of Instant Messaging, with little loss of meaning. (http://www.geocities.com/nashville/3448/tomjoad.html) It might be possible for someone to get a grant funded that examines whether or not the common IM-ing abbreviation-based language works better to communicate the records of contemporary affairs and history across sociocultural groups, than Standard American English. The losses of literacy that Dan points out are more about the ineffectiveness of public education to bring students to a useful level of literacy, than about the media and syntax that's used to transmit recorded culture and history. Regards, Peter Gold KnowHow ProServices Daniel Emory wrote: --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as a device that you can comfortably and safely use in the tub is concerned, I don't think that paper will be the delivery method of the future. It’s estimated that 40% of the US adult population is non-literate, which means they don’t read books or newspapers. This has been accompanied by a rapid decline in the ability of college students to write a half-way decent paragraph in English. The California State College system, the largest in the nation, takes almost any applicant who got through high-school degree with half-way decent grades. But about 40% of its first year students are not capable of doing college-level work, and thus their first year is dominated by remedial classes in English, Math and other subjects they should have mastered in high school. These declines all coincide with the growth of the internet, and the shift from obtaining knowledge from paper books to learning from feeble snippets of on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those who are at least competent in the English language, consists mainly of opinions unsupported by any factual basis. When you read tomes from the 1990’s extolling the promise of hypertext to change the way people think and use information, (I recommend the “Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), you begin to realize that it’s promise was still-born. The hypertext pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of link types that would create hypertexts which were true “searchable mazes” Frame Technology, beginning in FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link types which would have realized that original vision. When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried out that vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker link types in PDF. It failed to do so. And so, the HTML standard, with only the most primitive hypertext link type, became the standard. There was some hope that the XML standard would have rich linking capabilities. It added a few additional link types, but nowhere near enough to realize the original promise of hypertext. The result is that most online help documents are shovelware. I wrote an article about that, “Thoughts About On-Line Help”, about 6 years ago. It’s still available at: http://www.microtype.com/resources/articles/Oldocs_DE.pdf Although I would probably add some additional concepts and ideas if I wrote that article today, I still stand by most of what’s stated there. In particular, I stand by my statements in that article about the many advantages of paper books (or PDFs which faithfully replicate the format and layout of well-designed paper books). Getting back to what I state in the first two paragraphs above, I maintain that the ability to acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject is a discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no doubt that well-written, well-organized paper books, particularly on difficult subjects, will continue to be the best way to acquire real, in-depth knowledge of a subject, and subsequently serve its owner as a valuable reference source. If the internet (and other vehicles of on-line content) continues to serve mainly to encourage an undiscipplined pseudo-approach to real learning, it will remain a major cause of rising non-literacy. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit
Re: Confused about hexadecimal codes
Jeremy, Thanks - that's what I was afraid of! I was hoping to be able to use the generic code that I use for other purposes and avoid having to write a mapping system. Oh well. Pat -- CatBase: The Data Publishing Solution CatBase Software Ltd. T: +44 (0) 1462 454522 W: http://www.catbase.com skype: pat.bensky -- From: Jeremy H. Griffith [EMAIL PROTECTED] Organization: Omni Systems, Inc. Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 19:15:58 -0700 To: Frame Users framers@lists.frameusers.com Cc: Pat Bensky [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Confused about hexadecimal codes On Sat, 19 May 2007 15:43:58 +0100, Pat Bensky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm fiddling about with a program that creates MIF files and changing one of its behaviours - instead of inserting character tags for special characters, such as Char Tab, I want to use the hexadecimal code. According to the Frame Character_Sets manual, the hex code for a tab (for example) is \x08. However logic - and every other hex code reference that I've checked - tells me it's 09, not 08 (logical because the ASCII code for a tab is 9). 08 is the code for a backspace. Even odder is that the 08 code does seem to work as a tab with FrameMaker. Why is this different? And how can I tell which other codes are different from the standard set, other than checking each one individually? I'm puzzled about this! Anybody got any answers? FrameMaker uses its own character set internally, similar to (but not identical to) the Mac character set. It's documented in the FrameMaker Quick Reference booklet, and in: \yourframedir\OnlineManuals\Character_Sets.pdf which appears to be the doc you are looking at. A *lot* of codes are different from the standard ANSI set. We use mapping tables in Mif2Go. Note that for dingbats fonts, the mapping is *different* from that for normal fonts. ;-) -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.omsys.com/ ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: PDF Content reuse with Frame + DITA?
Thanks Scott! I think i will settle for show/hide. And if I do, is there a way to handle index/toc/variables (such as name of the book) automatically? Or do I do that manually? And let's say I have to implement DITA. Can I still publish two different PDFs selectively? And how will I carry out the selection of text in Structured Frame? Thanks again! Gyanesh On 5/18/07, Scott Prentice [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Gyanesh... If your main goal is to publish two different sets of content from the same FM source files, I'd think that your best bet is to just use conditional text (show/hide) in unstructured FM files. There are probably benefits you could gain by moving to structure and/or DITA (and it can certainly be done with structure/DITA), but for what you're talking about, conditional text is really all you need. Just create two conditional tags and apply those tags to the content that is only for one product or the other (just don't overlap conditions) .. anything that is common to both would be left untagged. Use the conditional text show/hide settings to show one and hide the other, then generate your PDF. Cheers! ...scott Gyanesh Talwar wrote: Hello Framers, (Frame 7.2b144) For my product, I have 2 guides with similar content across different chapters. Can I publish two different PDFs from the same source (with selective content obviously). - How will this be done? Using topic IDs? - Is Show/hide a better option for this than Structured Frame? - Is it viable to use DITA for this? Some other EDD ...or custome made? TIA, Gyanesh -- Gyanesh Talwar |~~^~~^~~~^~~^~~| Bunbu Itchi |~~^~~^~~~^~~^~~| ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Hi Dan, Daniel Emory wrote: It’s estimated that 40% of the US adult population is non-literate, which means they don’t read books or newspapers. This has been accompanied by a rapid decline in the ability of college students to write a half-way decent paragraph in English. The California State College system, the largest in the nation, takes almost any applicant who got through high-school degree with half-way decent grades. But about 40% of its first year students are not capable of doing college-level work, and thus their first year is dominated by remedial classes in English, Math and other subjects they should have mastered in high school. These declines all coincide with the growth of the internet, and the shift from obtaining knowledge from paper books to learning from feeble snippets of on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those who are at least competent in the English language, consists mainly of opinions unsupported by any factual basis. Although I feel that what you are saying may well have merit, I'm reluctant to jump to any conclusions too quickly. A favourite example of misdirected causality is the inexplicable reduction in crime for young males in New York city. Politicians claimed for years that it was due to their tough on crime policy, yet the drop surpassed that of cities with similar policies. Eventually someone figured out that it coincided with abortion being made more freely available - less children being born into poor homes where they weren't wanted translated into fewer boys thinking crime was the way up and girls thinking pregnancy was. Of course it's not conclusive, but it's as plausible as the mismatched tough on crime line... There could be an element of that in your reasoning, I feel. Whether information is to be delivered on paper or on screen doesn't predispose it to being written at a certain level of quality. Whether it's being delivered electronically or on paper, there will *always* be a need for people who are able to write clearly. Some information is too critical to risk misinterpretation. It's certainly true that there's a lot of poor writing on the internet, but that's partly because there's so much information. Take this posting as a case in point - I don't claim to write with any particular proficiency, but you're reading it because it landed in your email. Had it not, it's extremely unlikely that we'd be exchanging letters about this topic, if for no other reason than the fact that we didn't realise the other was interested in it. When you read tomes from the 1990’s extolling the promise of hypertext to change the way people think and use information, (I recommend the “Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), you begin to realize that it’s promise was still-born. The hypertext pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of link types that would create hypertexts which were true “searchable mazes” Frame Technology, beginning in FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link types which would have realized that original vision. True, but linking is difficult. It's easy if the ends of all of the links reside in your domain, but how do you know if the point within a document owned by someone else still means what it did when you first pointed at it? It's tough enough for a link to even know whether the document still exists, let alone how it might degrade gracefully to another resource, how to determine the impact of the missing link on the viability of the rest of the document, etc. It's still relatively early days and linking is one of the key components of a rich internet, so it's getting plenty of attention. When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried out that vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker link types in PDF. It failed to do so. And so, the HTML standard, with only the most primitive hypertext link type, became the standard. There was some hope that the XML standard would have rich linking capabilities. It added a few additional link types, but nowhere near enough to realize the original promise of hypertext. You certainly could be on to something with that - one of the ways that FrameMaker could be kept relevant would be to concentrate heavily on linking, including to documents outside of the current book. PDF would provide a great platform for that - it might even be enough to increase the use of PDF on the internet. (They'd want to make loading a PDF quicker and less obvious first though.) Getting back to what I state in the first two paragraphs above, I maintain that the ability to acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject is a discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no doubt that well-written, well-organized paper books, particularly on difficult subjects, will continue to be the best way to acquire real, in-depth knowledge of a subject, and subsequently serve its owner as a valuable reference source. In-depth knowledge isn't always desirable -
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Marcus Carr wrote: That said though, there is truth to what you say - the real question is whether it matters. In my parent's day, neat cursive handwriting was very important. It was arguably less important in my day and for my daughter, it will be of little importance, as in her life, she will unquestionably use a keyboard or some other device far more than she ever writes with a ballpoint. The same is true of mathematics - you can do complex calculation on your phone now, so it's not critical that you understand logarithmic tables and the like. I don't think that it's better or worse, just different. If legible cursive writing was the sole measurement of ability, I'd be in the same boat as many doctors - floating off to oblivion. However, I'd qualify Marcus' comment about using one's phone for complex calculations. If you don't have the knowledge to derive a statement of a need for calculating a solution by using observation, experience, and analytic thinking, and lack the knowledge to present the problem statement to the calculating device, then, unless the device itself has the intelligence to do it for you, and is willing to do it (think I'm sorry, Dave, I can't do that) it's whether it's the original calculus (stones used as counters), abaci, or iPhones, it's useless. My mother's criticism of the multiplication table matrix printed on the back cover of my grade-school composition books was, You'll never learn to multiply by yourself, if you can just look it up! Interestingly, on 60 Minutes today, there was a segment on Nicholas Negroponte's One Laptop Per Child project. MIT professor Nicholas Negroponte's dream is to put a laptop computer into the hands of every child. Lesley Stahl reports on his progress in Cambodia and Brazil. In those countries, government subsidies bring the cost of these computers down to $100. When they become available in the U. S., they'll cost $200, because for each one you buy, one is given to a child in a country where they're really needed. The video's available at: http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2830221n One of the sequences bore out the premise that even young kids can figure a lot of this (learning to use the computers to write, look for information and learning to use it) out for themselves, and help others to do it. Regards, Peter Gold KnowHow ProServices ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Peter Gold wrote: If legible cursive writing was the sole measurement of ability, I'd be in the same boat as many doctors - floating off to oblivion. Me too - it takes me longer to read my shopping list than to get my groceries... ;-) However, I'd qualify Marcus' comment about using one's phone for complex calculations. If you don't have the knowledge to derive a statement of a need for calculating a solution by using observation, experience, and analytic thinking, and lack the knowledge to present the problem statement to the calculating device, then, unless the device itself has the intelligence to do it for you, and is willing to do it (think I'm sorry, Dave, I can't do that) it's whether it's the original calculus (stones used as counters), abaci, or iPhones, it's useless. Yes, I agree with that, and I suspect that Dan may as well. (Dan, I hope I don't misrepresent your opinion in this post - I mean Dan metaphorically rather than personally.) The thing that's changing is that the internet is providing those devices, so we're able to get correct answers without really understanding what the question was. Take a mortgage calculator - you can pick a mortgage product, plug in the amount that you want to borrow and it will tell you what your monthly payments would be. It knows that the product you chose attracts an initiation fee and that for the amount that you wish to borrow, the bank will give you the mortgage for 25 points less than the standard interest rate. At a deeper level, it knows that the repayments are based on the assumption that the fee will be paid out of the amount borrowed, and numerous other details. I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to know those things - I want to know if I'm in the ballpark. Dan might question the accuracy of the calculator and the inability to cross-check it (especially if he was a Floridian voter... :-) and I would agree with him. The average person will lose the ability to do these calculations, but in order to create the calculator, someone will always have to understand how to do them. The same applies for writing, I suspect - most of us will be able to muddle along, but specialist writers will always be required. This does leave us with a gap in our knowledge - we have no choice but to trust the calculator because we couldn't figure it out if we wanted to. I'm less concerned due to a combination of factors - I don't really care in the first place, I'm fairly certain that given the vagaries of the bank's policy I wouldn't be able to figure it out anyway and finally, I *want* the bank to tell me how much it will be. I can put much more faith in an answer that they provided than one that I worked out for myself. My mother's criticism of the multiplication table matrix printed on the back cover of my grade-school composition books was, You'll never learn to multiply by yourself, if you can just look it up! Multiplication is an interesting case of abstraction in itself. Mathematicians (which I am *not*) regard multiplication to be shorthand for addition, but we don't teach that to kids. The question 5x6 can also be posed as 5+5+5+5+5+5, but the multiplication version is less verbose, so we pretend that they're different operations in order to make it less confusing. Well, that and the fact that the addition table matrix would have required a substantially bigger back cover... One of the sequences bore out the premise that even young kids can figure a lot of this (learning to use the computers to write, look for information and learning to use it) out for themselves, and help others to do it. It's hard to even imagine the next couple of generations of computer users. I'll get out of computers before then - it'll hurt my brain way too much trying to keep up with a grade 6 programming class... Marcus ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Do I need to jump into the Structured FM pool?
Lin Surasky wrote: > So I'm thinking that structured FM must be able to help, in that I could > somehow create element tags for Fixes and Issues, and then just change > the element tag for the Issues that have been fixed and somehow > regenerate the documents (how, I don't know -- do I need to maintain > this in a spreadsheet or database?) so that the content is moved to the > correct section along with its cross-referenced bullet (each section has > a bulleted list to make navigation easier). Oh yeah, and can they be > re-sorted by section into numerical order? Structure can certainly help - if you store your manuals in XML all the manual work can be eliminated. Chances are your bug tracking system can export reports in XML. An XSLT stylesheet can very easily replace the existing version of this information so when next you open the document in FrameMaker, the data is all updated. Of course, this open up myriad possibilities for customisation of the bug information - separation of code and interface bugs, ordering by severity for developers and date for managers, whatever you can imagine. The point is that generating this information is best accomplished by your bug tracking software, not by FrameMaker. It can generate a report of open bugs, so why would you want to do exactly that in FrameMaker? You may want to dump it all into FrameMaker and conditionally display it - providing different views for different audiences is very much part of what FrameMaker should be responsible for. Probably the biggest gain that you can get out of XML is the ability to make your information span applications, but to do so you obviously need to look wider than FrameMaker. You're doing software manuals by the sound of it, so you presumably have access to programmers. If I was you, the first step would be sit down with a couple of them and see if you have the resources to develop a scalable, robust system. I recommend against the "toe in the water" approach - I've seen too many people spending too much time trying to gradually improve them into the system that they knew they wanted but weren't brave enough to embark on in the first place. Measure twice, cut once and have fun! Marcus
FW: Adobe CEO interview
Ann Zdunczyk wrote: > It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices > for years but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books > are going away and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, > plan to continue reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a > screen, I do that all day. It is much easier to read a book at the > beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not > listen to books on tape, I READ. I love the SMELL of a book. I love the > feel of a book. Despite the fact that environmentally it would be very desirable to eliminate paper, I think the real push has been for the smart organization of information rather than the elimination of a clumsy way of delivering it. By all accounts, the amount of information being stored is still increasing dramatically and it's getting far easier for us to put our hands on it, so it's not that surprising that we continue to use at least as much paper as in the past. As far as a device that you can comfortably and safely use in the tub is concerned, I don't think that paper will be the delivery method of the future. Macintosh will no doubt come out with a range of topic-oriented scents (historic tome, murder mystery, etc.) for their TubPaper (TM) that will achieve your comfort factor as well as providing searchability, bookmarks that don't fall out, background music and can be adjusted for reading in candlelight. I asked my daughter what she was doing at school a couple of weeks ago. "We're creating a database of endangered species" was the answer. I thought that was kind of interesting... because she's 8 years old and in grade 3. Paper books are going the way of the comforting crackling of the wireless. Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, but like you, I hope they manage to. Marcus
FW: Adobe CEO interview
mcarr at allette.com.au wrote: > Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, > but like you, I hope they manage to. But why? FM is only a tool for the creation of content. CS3 is also a content creation tool, but does things with various content data types. When I remarked about Narayen's strategy of banking the farm on Web 2.0 I was also pointing to something that I think is a big mistake on his part. He is banking on being able to be the market leader in content creation, which is where there is the greatest competition. For every one of Adobe's products there are alternatives, some of which are free (both in the sense of no charge as well as in terms of licensing). Web 2.0 is nothing more than a phase. It is a developmental plateau on the way to somewhere else and for Narayen to steer the course of Adobe's future towards it means that he is already behind the competition who are moving on to other means of producing output from semi/unstructured data sources. Once upon a time Adobe used to create the targets -- Postscript, PDF, type technologies, etc. --- now they appear to have become me too's. FM is even more relevant now than ever before with its ability to manage semi-structured data and producing multiple forms of output from a single source. Yet it is able to do this from within relatively simple (if somewhat aged) interface. But, having said that, I hope Adobe are never tempted to mess with FrameMaker's interface. It is something I am well used to and I don't have to waste inordinate amounts of time figuring out "where did they put that damned widget this time". Alan
FW: Adobe CEO interview
Alan wrote: >> Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, >> but like you, I hope they manage to. > > But why? FM is only a tool for the creation of content. CS3 is also > a content creation tool, but does things with various content data > types. I don't really see FrameMaker as being a tool for the creation of content, at least not in the sense that it has been in the past. I see it more as being a tool for the publishing of content. I know that my thinking is colored by the type of work that I trend to be involved with, but I just don't see people setting up for big sets of manuals built on unstructured FrameMaker the way they used to. Frankly, I'd be very surprised if that approach was growing in popularity. I don't know anything about CS3, but any software that contains the word "suite" makes me nervous - my first thought would be "might I need to use it from end-to-end even if I have existing systems functioning well for some components"? I may be completely wrong - please go easy on me if I am. > When I remarked about Narayen's strategy of banking the farm on Web 2.0 > I was also pointing to something that I think is a big mistake on his > part. He is banking on being able to be the market leader in content > creation, which is where there is the greatest competition. I agree with you there - nobody is ever going to own these markets again. I like to think that the interoperability provided by XML has contributed to the demise of software lock-in. Concepts like Software As A Service also eliminate the uneconomical model of many of the licenses purchased not being in use at any given point, as was discussed on Framers over the past week. > Web 2.0 is nothing more than a phase. It is a developmental plateau on > the way to somewhere else and for Narayen to steer the course of > Adobe's future towards it means that he is already behind the > competition who are moving on to other means of producing output from > semi/unstructured data sources. Once upon a time Adobe used to create > the targets -- Postscript, PDF, type technologies, etc. --- now they > appear to have become me too's. That might be a bit harsh - the way things move these days, I think a lot of people feel that metoodom would be a pretty respectable goal. :-) Adobe have to hang their hats on something and while I completely agree that Web 2.0 is ill-defined, I think they could do worse. > FM is even more relevant now than ever before with its ability to manage > semi-structured data and producing multiple forms of output from a single > source. There we disagree. I think that FrameMaker's traditional niche will continue to shrink until the software ceases to be viable. Adobe has picked winners plenty of times in the past, so I have a reasonable amount of faith that they can do it again and keep FrameMaker relevant, but not by maintaining the status quo. > Yet it is able to do this from within relatively simple (if > somewhat aged) interface. But, having said that, I hope Adobe are > never tempted to mess with FrameMaker's interface. It is something > I am well used to and I don't have to waste inordinate amounts of > time figuring out "where did they put that damned widget this time". I think this reflects our different use - I don't really have any loyalty to the interface because I don't spend that much time using it. I'd learn the interface if new features made it worth it. Marcus
FW: Adobe CEO interview
At 5:31 PM -0400 5/18/07, Ann Zdunczyk wrote: >It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years >but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books are going away >and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, plan to continue >reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a screen, I do that all day. >It is much easier to read a book at the beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather >that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not listen to books on tape, I READ. I love >the SMELL of a book. I love the feel of a book. > >I like FrameMaker. I know FrameMaker. I plan to use it until it no longer >works on ANY of the machines I have. I still use FrameMaker on my MAC. I >have been using FrameMaker since 3.0 back in the early 90's (when it was >Frame Technologies). I use it as it is. I'll ditto that. Dead tree based publishing isn't likely to go away any time soon. - web
FW: Adobe CEO interview
--- mcarr at allette.com.au wrote: > As far as a device that you can comfortably and > safely use in the tub is > concerned, I don't think that paper will be the > delivery method of the > future. It?s estimated that 40% of the US adult population is non-literate, which means they don?t read books or newspapers. This has been accompanied by a rapid decline in the ability of college students to write a half-way decent paragraph in English. The California State College system, the largest in the nation, takes almost any applicant who got through high-school degree with half-way decent grades. But about 40% of its first year students are not capable of doing college-level work, and thus their first year is dominated by remedial classes in English, Math and other subjects they should have mastered in high school. These declines all coincide with the growth of the internet, and the shift from obtaining knowledge from paper books to learning from feeble snippets of on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those who are at least competent in the English language, consists mainly of opinions unsupported by any factual basis. When you read tomes from the 1990?s extolling the promise of hypertext to change the way people think and use information, (I recommend the ?Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), you begin to realize that it?s promise was still-born. The hypertext pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of link types that would create hypertexts which were true ?searchable mazes? Frame Technology, beginning in FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link types which would have realized that original vision. When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried out that vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker link types in PDF. It failed to do so. And so, the HTML standard, with only the most primitive hypertext link type, became the standard. There was some hope that the XML standard would have rich linking capabilities. It added a few additional link types, but nowhere near enough to realize the original promise of hypertext. The result is that most online help documents are shovelware. I wrote an article about that, ?Thoughts About On-Line Help?, about 6 years ago. It?s still available at: http://www.microtype.com/resources/articles/Oldocs_DE.pdf Although I would probably add some additional concepts and ideas if I wrote that article today, I still stand by most of what?s stated there. In particular, I stand by my statements in that article about the many advantages of paper books (or PDFs which faithfully replicate the format and layout of well-designed paper books). Getting back to what I state in the first two paragraphs above, I maintain that the ability to acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject is a discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no doubt that well-written, well-organized paper books, particularly on difficult subjects, will continue to be the best way to acquire real, in-depth knowledge of a subject, and subsequently serve its owner as a valuable reference source. If the internet (and other vehicles of on-line content) continues to serve mainly to encourage an undiscipplined pseudo-approach to real learning, it will remain a major cause of rising non-literacy.
PDF Content reuse with Frame + DITA?
Hi Gyanesh... Each time you regenerate your book, the conditional settings in effect, will define the content shown in the generated lists (Index and TOC specifically). The index is generated from index markers, and they will be used (or not) depending on their conditional tagging. This isn't too bad if the index markers are within a paragraph that is tagged with a condition, but if you just want to conditionalize words within a marker, that's a bit tougher .. in general you'd need to create duplicate markers with different text, and conditionalize each marker accordingly. However this is difficult to maintain since it's very hard to just tag a single marker with a specific condition. There are a couple of plugins that help with conditionalized or variable content in a marker (MarkerTools and Index Tools Pro .. links below). It's a good practice to avoid conditional content within index entries .. it's one thing to include/exclude a marker in a specific output, but if you start messing with words within a marker, you'll go nuts. MarkerTools - http://www.leximation.com/tools/info/markertools.php Index Tools Pro - http://www.siliconprairiesoftware.com/Products.html The TOC is generated from the paragraph styles (headings) that you specify, and it will only pull in the content that is in a "show" state. As with markers, it's good to avoid conditionalizing specific words in headings .. it can be done but you have to be careful to conditionalize the spaces properly so you don't end up with too few or too many. Variables will show/hide along with the surrounding content that is tagged in a certain way. If you want to change the definition of a variable for different output types, you can change the values in a template and import that into all files into the book .. or use our BookVars plugin to swap the definitions as needed. BookVars - http://www.leximation.com/tools/info/bookvars.php If you're using DITA, depending on the method you're using to create the PDFs (through Frame or through the DITA-OT), you can still use conditional tagging, or you can use the filtering attributes on each element. With DITA, you'd typically set the filtering attributes on elements to determine the product, audience, etc. and when you generate your output, you'd filter out the elements that don't apply to that version (similar to using conditional tags). There's a great plugin (ABCM) for Frame that lets you apply conditions (and thus hide/show content) based on attribute values. This is a must if you're producing output through Frame and want to use attribute values to do the filtering (it's free too!). (If you're generating your output through the XSLT transformations in the DITA-OT, you'd do this filtering using a ditavals file.) ABCM - http://www.weststreetconsulting.com/WSC_ABCM.htm Good luck! ...scott Scott Prentice Leximation, Inc. www.leximation.com +1.415.485.1892 Gyanesh Talwar wrote: > Thanks Scott! > > I think i will settle for show/hide. And if I do, is there a way to > handle index/toc/variables (such as name of the book) automatically? > Or do I do that manually? > > And let's say I have to implement DITA. Can I still publish two > different PDFs selectively? And how will I carry out the selection of > text in Structured Frame? > > Thanks again! > > Gyanesh > > > On 5/18/07, Scott Prentice wrote: >> Hi Gyanesh... >> >> If your main goal is to publish two different sets of content from the >> same FM source files, I'd think that your best bet is to just use >> conditional text (show/hide) in unstructured FM files. There are >> probably benefits you could gain by moving to structure and/or DITA (and >> it can certainly be done with structure/DITA), but for what you're >> talking about, conditional text is really all you need. Just create two >> conditional tags and apply those tags to the content that is only for >> one product or the other (just don't overlap conditions) .. anything >> that is common to both would be left untagged. Use the conditional text >> show/hide settings to show one and hide the other, then generate your >> PDF. >> >> Cheers! >> >> ...scott >> >> >> >> Gyanesh Talwar wrote: >> > Hello Framers, >> > >> > (Frame 7.2b144) >> > >> > For my product, I have 2 guides with similar content across different >> > chapters. Can I publish two different PDFs from the same source (with >> > selective content obviously). >> > >> > -> How will this be done? Using topic IDs? >> > -> Is Show/hide a better option for this than Structured Frame? >> > -> Is it viable to use DITA for this? Some other EDD ...or custome >> made? >> > >> > TIA, >> > Gyanesh >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >
PDF Content reuse with Frame + DITA?
On Sun, 20 May 2007 13:30:45 -0700, Scott Prentice wrote: >It's a good practice to avoid conditional content within >index entries .. it's one thing to include/exclude a marker >in a specific output, but if you start messing with words >within a marker, you'll go nuts. It's not only good practice, it's the law. ;-) Frame *implements* conditional text using markers. So it's flat-out impossible to conditionalize *within* a marker. As Scott says, the closest you can get to that is: >you'd need to create duplicate markers with different text, >and conditionalize each marker accordingly. However this >is difficult to maintain ... -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc. http://www.omsys.com/
PDF Content reuse with Frame + DITA?
Thanks Jeremy .. good point! Now that I read what I wrote, I can see how it could be misunderstood. I meant that even if you do duplicate and conditionalize markers just to change one word in that marker, it will become a mess to manage. :) The Index Tools Pro plugin claims to provide for "conditional index entries" .. I'm not sure what that means exactly, but it may perhaps make the process of conditionalizing individual markers easier. Our plugin, MarkerTools, lets you insert a custom "building block" into markers which maps to variables that are defined in your document .. in essence allowing you to have variables within markers (not possible without the plugin). This can give you a type of conditional control within a marker (especially when used in conjunction with BookVars). ...scott Jeremy H. Griffith wrote: > On Sun, 20 May 2007 13:30:45 -0700, Scott Prentice wrote: > > >> It's a good practice to avoid conditional content within >> index entries .. it's one thing to include/exclude a marker >> in a specific output, but if you start messing with words >> within a marker, you'll go nuts. >> > > It's not only good practice, it's the law. ;-) > > Frame *implements* conditional text using markers. So it's > flat-out impossible to conditionalize *within* a marker. > As Scott says, the closest you can get to that is: > > >> you'd need to create duplicate markers with different text, >> and conditionalize each marker accordingly. However this >> is difficult to maintain ... >> > > > -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc. > http://www.omsys.com/ > > > > >
FW: Adobe CEO interview
Overall, I agree with Dan's point on how much opportunity for a rich electronic communications environment has been overlooked. On the other hand, who among us can be sure that there's no "alternative rich communications universe" embedded in the shorthand languages of "IM" and "rap?" Where's the Rosetta Stone that can cross-translate among "Standard English," "common idiomatic English," "generally-accepted slang-lish," "blended-with-various-ethnic-based-languages English," etc? Some people can communicate better than others. Woody Guthrie summarized the main themes and meanings of the film of Steinbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath" in one night, in language that almost anyone can read and grasp. It probably would survive the cryptic notation of Instant Messaging, with little loss of meaning. (http://www.geocities.com/nashville/3448/tomjoad.html) It might be possible for someone to get a grant funded that examines whether or not the common "IM-ing" abbreviation-based language works better to communicate the records of contemporary affairs and history across sociocultural groups, than "Standard American English." The losses of literacy that Dan points out are more about the ineffectiveness of public education to bring students to a useful level of literacy, than about the media and syntax that's used to transmit recorded culture and history. Regards, Peter Gold KnowHow ProServices Daniel Emory wrote: > --- mcarr at allette.com.au wrote: >> As far as a device that you can comfortably and >> safely use in the tub is >> concerned, I don't think that paper will be the >> delivery method of the >> future. > > It?s estimated that 40% of the US adult population is > non-literate, which means they don?t read books or > newspapers. This has been accompanied by a rapid > decline in the ability of college students to write a > half-way decent paragraph in English. The California > State College system, the largest in the nation, takes > almost any applicant who got through high-school > degree with half-way decent grades. But about 40% of > its first year students are not capable of doing > college-level work, and thus their first year is > dominated by remedial classes in English, Math and > other subjects they should have mastered in high > school. > > These declines all coincide with the growth of the > internet, and the shift from obtaining knowledge from > paper books to learning from feeble snippets of > on-line text. The blogosphere, dominated by those who > are at least competent in the English language, > consists mainly of opinions unsupported by any factual > basis. > > When you read tomes from the 1990?s extolling the > promise of hypertext to change the way people think > and use information, (I recommend the > ?Hypertext/Hypermedia Handbook by Berk and Devlin), > you begin to realize that it?s promise was still-born. > The hypertext pioneers envisioned a rich panoply of > link types that would create hypertexts which were > true ?searchable mazes? Frame Technology, beginning in > FrameMaker 4, added a rich variety of hypertext link > types which would have realized that original vision. > When Adobe took over FrameMaker, it could have carried > out that vision by implementing all of the FrameMaker > link types in PDF. It failed to do so. And so, the > HTML standard, with only the most primitive hypertext > link type, became the standard. There was some hope > that the XML standard would have rich linking > capabilities. It added a few additional link types, > but nowhere near enough to realize the original > promise of hypertext. > > The result is that most online help documents are > shovelware. I wrote an article about that, ?Thoughts > About On-Line Help?, about 6 years ago. It?s still > available at: > > http://www.microtype.com/resources/articles/Oldocs_DE.pdf > > Although I would probably add some additional concepts > and ideas if I wrote that article today, I still stand > by most of what?s stated there. In particular, I stand > by my statements in that article about the many > advantages of paper books (or PDFs which faithfully > replicate the format and layout of well-designed paper > books). > > Getting back to what I state in the first two > paragraphs above, I maintain that the ability to > acquire in-depth knowledge of a subject is a > discipline which is difficult to master. And I have no > doubt that well-written, well-organized paper books, > particularly on difficult subjects, will continue to > be the best way to acquire real, in-depth knowledge of > a subject, and subsequently serve its owner as a > valuable reference source. If the internet (and other > vehicles of on-line content) continues to serve mainly > to encourage an undiscipplined pseudo-approach to real > learning, it will remain a major cause of rising > non-literacy. >
Confused about hexadecimal codes
Jeremy, Thanks - that's what I was afraid of! I was hoping to be able to use the generic code that I use for other purposes and avoid having to write a mapping system. Oh well. Pat -- CatBase: The Data Publishing Solution CatBase Software Ltd. T: +44 (0) 1462 454522 W: http://www.catbase.com skype: pat.bensky -- > From: "Jeremy H. Griffith" > Organization: Omni Systems, Inc. > Date: Sat, 19 May 2007 19:15:58 -0700 > To: Frame Users > Cc: Pat Bensky > Subject: Re: Confused about hexadecimal codes > > On Sat, 19 May 2007 15:43:58 +0100, Pat Bensky wrote: > >> I'm fiddling about with a program that creates MIF files and changing one of >> its behaviours - instead of inserting character tags for special characters, >> such as , I want to use the hexadecimal code. According to the >> Frame Character_Sets manual, the hex code for a tab (for example) is \x08. >> However logic - and every other hex code reference that I've checked - tells >> me it's 09, not 08 (logical because the ASCII code for a tab is 9). 08 is >> the code for a backspace. Even odder is that the 08 code does seem to work >> as a tab with FrameMaker. >> >> Why is this different? And how can I tell which other codes are different >> from the standard set, other than checking each one individually? >> >> I'm puzzled about this! Anybody got any answers? > > FrameMaker uses its own character set internally, similar to > (but not identical to) the Mac character set. It's documented > in the FrameMaker Quick Reference booklet, and in: > \yourframedir\OnlineManuals\Character_Sets.pdf > which appears to be the doc you are looking at. > > A *lot* of codes are different from the standard ANSI set. We > use mapping tables in Mif2Go. Note that for "dingbats" fonts, > the mapping is *different* from that for "normal" fonts. ;-) > > -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc. > http://www.omsys.com/
PDF Content reuse with Frame + DITA?
Thanks Scott! I think i will settle for show/hide. And if I do, is there a way to handle index/toc/variables (such as name of the book) automatically? Or do I do that manually? And let's say I have to implement DITA. Can I still publish two different PDFs selectively? And how will I carry out the selection of text in Structured Frame? Thanks again! Gyanesh On 5/18/07, Scott Prentice wrote: > Hi Gyanesh... > > If your main goal is to publish two different sets of content from the > same FM source files, I'd think that your best bet is to just use > conditional text (show/hide) in unstructured FM files. There are > probably benefits you could gain by moving to structure and/or DITA (and > it can certainly be done with structure/DITA), but for what you're > talking about, conditional text is really all you need. Just create two > conditional tags and apply those tags to the content that is only for > one product or the other (just don't overlap conditions) .. anything > that is common to both would be left untagged. Use the conditional text > show/hide settings to show one and hide the other, then generate your PDF. > > Cheers! > > ...scott > > > > Gyanesh Talwar wrote: > > Hello Framers, > > > > (Frame 7.2b144) > > > > For my product, I have 2 guides with similar content across different > > chapters. Can I publish two different PDFs from the same source (with > > selective content obviously). > > > > -> How will this be done? Using topic IDs? > > -> Is Show/hide a better option for this than Structured Frame? > > -> Is it viable to use DITA for this? Some other EDD ...or custome made? > > > > TIA, > > Gyanesh > > > > > > > > > > -- Gyanesh Talwar |~~^~~^~~~^~~^~~| "Bunbu Itchi" |~~^~~^~~~^~~^~~|
FW: Adobe CEO interview
Marcus Carr wrote: > > That said though, there is truth to what you say - the real question is > whether it matters. In my parent's day, neat cursive handwriting was > very important. It was arguably less important in my day and for my > daughter, it will be of little importance, as in her life, she will > unquestionably use a keyboard or some other device far more than she > ever writes with a ballpoint. The same is true of mathematics - you can > do complex calculation on your phone now, so it's not critical that you > understand logarithmic tables and the like. I don't think that it's > better or worse, just different. If legible cursive writing was the sole measurement of ability, I'd be in the same boat as many doctors - floating off to oblivion. However, I'd qualify Marcus' comment about using one's phone for complex calculations. If you don't have the knowledge to derive a statement of a need for calculating a solution by using observation, experience, and analytic thinking, and lack the knowledge to present the problem statement to the calculating device, then, unless the device itself has the intelligence to do it for you, and is willing to do it (think "I'm sorry, Dave, I can't do that") it's whether it's the original calculus (stones used as counters), abaci, or iPhones, it's useless. My mother's criticism of the multiplication table matrix printed on the back cover of my grade-school composition books was, "You'll never learn to multiply by yourself, if you can just look it up!" Interestingly, on "60 Minutes" today, there was a segment on Nicholas Negroponte's "One Laptop Per Child" project. "MIT professor Nicholas Negroponte's dream is to put a laptop computer into the hands of every child. Lesley Stahl reports on his progress in Cambodia and Brazil." In those countries, government subsidies bring the cost of these computers down to $100. When they become available in the U. S., they'll cost $200, because for each one you buy, one is given to a child in a country where they're really needed. The video's available at: http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2830221n One of the sequences bore out the premise that even young kids can figure a lot of this (learning to use the computers to write, look for information and learning to use it) out for themselves, and help others to do it. Regards, Peter Gold KnowHow ProServices
