Re: MadCap Blaze

[Bill Swallow]

 Sharon Burton, from MadCap, did a presentation at our last STC meeting. She 
 said that Blaze was for people who only did print publishing and Flare was 
 for print and help files etc.

This was one of the disconnects I had. Why only print? Who does only
print these days? Even FrameMaker out of the box does more than print.
So you need Flare AND Blaze to do print and Help? Seems like overhead
to me, and I don't understand this business model at all.

  Both Blaze and Flare make you write in a topic-oriented way, yet it doesn't 
 do DITA. Sharon talked about all of the advantages of doing topic-oriented 
 writing.

Topic oriented writing has its advantages, and so does DITA, which is
much more granular than topic oriented. There are advantages to DITA
over topic oriented if you have a need to use the same content in
multiple spots (like a note, definition, or anything else smaller than
a topic) or across product documents. I was rather unimpressed, to be
honest, when I learned that Blaze didn't support DITA. That, IMHO,
gives FrameMaker a huge leg up over Blaze.

  I asked her why MadCap would make a product that doesn't do DITA when they 
 are trying to compete with Frame. I said that right now, with Frame 8, all I 
 had to do was flip it to structured and I had DITA, so moving to Blaze or 
 Flare was a step backward. She didn't really have an answer for me on that.

She didn't have an answer for me, either.

  She said that Madcap was creating a CMS first, and then it was going to make 
 Blaze and Flare DITA compatible. I told her that in my opinion, that was a 
 bad plan. They will never be competitive with Frame until they do DITA, and 
 no one is going to buy a CMS when they can get Subversion and CVS for free so 
 they would be better off doing DITA now and the CMS later.

Right. There shouldn't be a dependency on a proprietary CMS for Flare
and Blaze if the content is indeed XML (which it's not).

-- 
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager
http://techcommdood.blogspot.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: More like a flicker than a Blaze

[Bill Swallow]

You'd be better off using Flare for that than Blaze.

On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Hedley Finger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Blaze the FrameMaker killer?  Don't make me laugh.

  P.S.  But if I want an advanced XHTML editor for my web site, this
  baby will do.

-- 
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager
http://techcommdood.blogspot.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: MadCap Blaze

[Sharon Burton]

Vendor Post

I've been at WritersUA and away from my personal email since Sunday. I got
back late last night. I'm the product manager for Blaze. (BTW - great
conference!)

Some clarifications: Blaze is the younger sister of Flare 4. If you need
complex print and online docs, then you want Flare 4. If you only need
printed output, then you want Blaze. Everything that's in Blaze will be in
Flare 4.

Blaze is a fully featured print authoring and publishing system. It imports
and exports Frame and Word because you may have a workflow that requires you
to import from or export to these formats for some reason. We want to
account for that.

However, you don't *need* to export to Frame to get your output if your
workflow doesn't require that. You can import existing Word or Frame
documents and you're good to go. Then you can directly create PDFs or XPSs
as your deliverables, with the content for those deliverables based on your
Outlines.

Our page design and layout in Blaze is robust so there's no need to export
to Frame if your workflow doesn't require Frame as an output.

One of the biggest differences in Blaze - and really, Flare - is that you
are not authoring long documents, but rather you're authoring topics. Then,
using Outlines, you put together the topics into the deliverables; for
example, a User's Guide and an Admin Guide.

There's nothing to prevent you from authoring just like you do in Word of
Frame in that you can open a new topic in Blaze and then write a 200 page
document in one topic. But by doing that, you lose the power of topic-based
content development that easily allows content reuse across multiple
deliverables for one or more projects.

I strongly urge you to attend one of my online demos to learn more about the
paradigm shift for Blaze. If you are not aware of the shift and just click
Next in the import wizard, you are going to wind up with a mess. I go over
that in the demos. (Don't try to signup for a few hours, as all the
scheduled demos for the next 6 weeks are full and I have to schedule more.
Give me until about 9am Pacific today, please.)

As to our newly announced product Press, it's for glossy print materials,
like Annual reports or other glossy printed material. It's related to our
other products, but it's not the only press solution. As to DITA or CMS,
check out our just announced product Team Server. It's a workflow management
tool that's amazing. We have ideas about what it should do but we want your
input about what you need that tool to do.

I'm delighted to answer questions about Blaze or any of our products. If you
could send those questions to my MadCap email, that would help me a lot.
[EMAIL PROTECTED], please.

sharon

Sharon Burton
MadCap Software
Product Manager
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://madcapsoftware.wordpress.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: MadCap Blaze

[Bill Swallow]

  Some clarifications: Blaze is the younger sister of Flare 4. If you need
  complex print and online docs, then you want Flare 4. If you only need
  printed output, then you want Blaze. Everything that's in Blaze will be in
  Flare 4.

I really don't understand this, I'm not trying to be difficult... But
if Flare does everything that Blaze does and more, and Flare's been
out for years, why develop Blaze at all? I guess I don't see the point
of spending the time, energy, and money to develop a brand new product
that does a subset of what another of your products already does.

  One of the biggest differences in Blaze - and really, Flare - is that you
  are not authoring long documents, but rather you're authoring topics. Then,
  using Outlines, you put together the topics into the deliverables; for
  example, a User's Guide and an Admin Guide.

The classic authoring model for FrameMaker is indeed long document
authoring, but it's not so with DITA.

  There's nothing to prevent you from authoring just like you do in Word of
  Frame in that you can open a new topic in Blaze and then write a 200 page
  document in one topic. But by doing that, you lose the power of topic-based
  content development that easily allows content reuse across multiple
  deliverables for one or more projects.

Well, agreed. That would be just silly. For the record, I've done
topic-based authoring in FrameMaker years ago. It's all about how you
approach your content structure. I needed to leverage topics in
different documents in different ways, so I just created a new
document for every portable topic. I don't think topic based content
authoring is a revolutionary concept.

  I strongly urge you to attend one of my online demos to learn more about the
  paradigm shift for Blaze.

I don't see a paradigm shift at all, but the UI is way different than
what non-Flare users would be accustomed to. But paradigm shift, no.
Topic based authoring is not a new concept.

  As to DITA or CMS,
  check out our just announced product Team Server. It's a workflow management
  tool that's amazing. We have ideas about what it should do but we want your
  input about what you need that tool to do.

I'm confused. Is it a product or is it an idea for a product?

  I'm delighted to answer questions about Blaze or any of our products. If you
  could send those questions to my MadCap email, that would help me a lot.
  [EMAIL PROTECTED], please.

I'll keep my questions on the list since that's where they originated.

-- 
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager
http://techcommdood.blogspot.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: MadCap Blaze

[Sharon Burton]

Because some people don't want or need online docs. For example, one of my
former clients was a cash register manufacturer. You can buy their products
for about $100. There is no concept of online help for these products, as
they don't come with a computer. I delivered a PDF of the manual and they
sent that to the printer. They delivered a printed book with the product.

Why should these people purchase a tool that does way more than they need?
Flare 4 is too much for them.

I don't wish to get into the DITA discussion because that's very far afield
from the discussion of the Blaze beta at this moment. If you are currently
doing DITA and you're happy with your tools, then good on you. MadCap will
support DITA in the future. That's all I wish to publicly disclose about our
plans for DITA at this time.

Team Server is being developed right now. I would expect it by the end of
the year. Because we want to know what you want in a product like this, and
because we are developing it right now, now would be the time to talk to us
about what you want in a workflow management tool. We want to build what you
are looking for in this sort of tool. We have ideas but you all know your
workflow needs.

I never said that topic-based authoring is a new concept. But it is a shift
from how most people think about docs. Thus, a discussion of this
development method is relevant. For lots of good info, see JoAnn Hackos's
newest book. She really explains it in detail.

And, yes, our UI is very different. Some people love it, some don't.

sharon

Sharon Burton


-Original Message-
From: Bill Swallow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 8:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Frame Users; Sharon Work
Subject: Re: MadCap Blaze


  Some clarifications: Blaze is the younger sister of Flare 4. If you need
  complex print and online docs, then you want Flare 4. If you only need
  printed output, then you want Blaze. Everything that's in Blaze will be
in
  Flare 4.

I really don't understand this, I'm not trying to be difficult... But
if Flare does everything that Blaze does and more, and Flare's been
out for years, why develop Blaze at all? I guess I don't see the point
of spending the time, energy, and money to develop a brand new product
that does a subset of what another of your products already does.

  One of the biggest differences in Blaze - and really, Flare - is that you
  are not authoring long documents, but rather you're authoring topics.
Then,
  using Outlines, you put together the topics into the deliverables; for
  example, a User's Guide and an Admin Guide.

The classic authoring model for FrameMaker is indeed long document
authoring, but it's not so with DITA.

  There's nothing to prevent you from authoring just like you do in Word of
  Frame in that you can open a new topic in Blaze and then write a 200 page
  document in one topic. But by doing that, you lose the power of
topic-based
  content development that easily allows content reuse across multiple
  deliverables for one or more projects.

Well, agreed. That would be just silly. For the record, I've done
topic-based authoring in FrameMaker years ago. It's all about how you
approach your content structure. I needed to leverage topics in
different documents in different ways, so I just created a new
document for every portable topic. I don't think topic based content
authoring is a revolutionary concept.

  I strongly urge you to attend one of my online demos to learn more about
the
  paradigm shift for Blaze.

I don't see a paradigm shift at all, but the UI is way different than
what non-Flare users would be accustomed to. But paradigm shift, no.
Topic based authoring is not a new concept.

  As to DITA or CMS,
  check out our just announced product Team Server. It's a workflow
management
  tool that's amazing. We have ideas about what it should do but we want
your
  input about what you need that tool to do.

I'm confused. Is it a product or is it an idea for a product?

  I'm delighted to answer questions about Blaze or any of our products. If
you
  could send those questions to my MadCap email, that would help me a lot.
  [EMAIL PROTECTED], please.

I'll keep my questions on the list since that's where they originated.

--
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager
http://techcommdood.blogspot.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.

Hypertext can't find target doc

[Butler, Darren J CTR USAF AFMC 584 CBSS/GBHAC]

FM.8.0, Windows XP

 

When using the Hypertext Command Open Document and adding the target file 
name to the syntax, I get a file does not exist error message and the target 
filename gets truncated. Is there a limit to the filename length?

___


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.

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Tina Ricks]

I'd like to export my Frame book (easily) to one giant Word file, and I
haven't figured out how to do it other than one file at a time, then put
them back together by hand in Word.

 

I have many outside reviewers who need to review and add comments
electronically, and like it or not, Word is the lingua franca of most of the
world. My reviewers are fine that the pages look a little weird in the Frame
RTF export.

 

I've been researching the commenting features in Acrobat 8, and I keep
coming across this statement: Commenting tools are only available in PDFs
that have commenting enabled. OK. but it looks as if I can't enable
commenting rights from the PDFs that come out of FM8's File  Save as PDF
feature (unless I'm missing something). I don't really want to buy full
Acrobat just for this feature.

 

Sending an enormous zip file of little Word documents isn't very efficient
for the reader on the other end.

 

There's no RTF option in File  Save Book As.

 

Ideas?

 

Tina Ricks

Editor, Trial Guides

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 

___


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: CGM import to Frame

[Owen, Clint]

Mike,

The CGM import filter comes from another company (Itedo, I think). If
you search the Adobe website for CGM Graphics you should find a couple
of articles that will have a link to another site where you can download
the latest version, which might solve your problem.

Clint 


Clint Owen 
Technical Publications
Crane Aerospace  Electronics 
425-743-8674


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike
Derryberry
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 6:54 AM
To: framers@lists.frameusers.com
Subject: CGM import to Frame

I am attempting to import CGM graphics from Unigraphics to Framemaker v
7.2.  Upon import, the graphics are scaled to about 10% of their
original size and changing the Framemaker import scale settings seems to
have little effect.  Any suggestions?

Mike 
___


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/clint.owen%40craneae
rospace.com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
We value your opinion!  How may we serve you better?
Please click the below survey link to tell us how we are doing.

http://www.craneae.com/surveys/satisfaction.htm

Your feedback is of the utmost importance to us! Thank you for your time!


##
Attention: 
The information contained in this email message may be privileged and is 
confidential information intended only for the use of the recipient, or any 
employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or copying of this information is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful.

If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and destroy the original message and all attachments from your 
electronic files.


This email was scanned and cleared by MailMarshal.
##
___


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.

CGM import to Frame

[Mike Derryberry]

I am attempting to import CGM graphics from Unigraphics to Framemaker  
v 7.2.  Upon import, the graphics are scaled to about 10% of their  
original size and changing the Framemaker import scale settings seems  
to have little effect.  Any suggestions?

Mike 
___


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: Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Michael O'Neill]

You do need Acrobat Professional in order to save the PDF with
commenting enabled for Adobe Reader.  

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tina Ricks
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 2:01 PM
To: 'Frame Users'
Subject: Export a FM book to single Word file?

I'd like to export my Frame book (easily) to one giant Word file, and I
haven't figured out how to do it other than one file at a time, then put
them back together by hand in Word.

 

I have many outside reviewers who need to review and add comments
electronically, and like it or not, Word is the lingua franca of most of
the
world. My reviewers are fine that the pages look a little weird in the
Frame
RTF export.

 

I've been researching the commenting features in Acrobat 8, and I keep
coming across this statement: Commenting tools are only available in
PDFs
that have commenting enabled. OK. but it looks as if I can't enable
commenting rights from the PDFs that come out of FM8's File  Save as
PDF
feature (unless I'm missing something). I don't really want to buy full
Acrobat just for this feature.

 

Sending an enormous zip file of little Word documents isn't very
efficient
for the reader on the other end.

 

There's no RTF option in File  Save Book As.

 

Ideas?

 

Tina Ricks

Editor, Trial Guides

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 

___


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/moneill%40meta-comm.
com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
___


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.

delivering XML on the web

[Mollye Barrett]

Dear Framers,

I'm working on a fun project (for an equipment manufacturer) using Frame
to author structured files that may (for a time) be published to PDF as
well as to XML. The XML files will be checked into a CMS and delivered to
the web for dynamic publication based on metadata and/or search.

Is anyone doing the same or something similar? I'm interested your
production path details, information model, lessons learned and, very
soon, navigation in the delivery environment.

I look forward to and appreciate any replies.

Mollye Barrett
ClearPath, LLC
414-331-1378
___


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: Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Jeremy H. Griffith]

On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 12:00:38 -0700, Tina Ricks [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:

I'd like to export my Frame book (easily) to one giant Word file, and I
haven't figured out how to do it other than one file at a time, then put
them back together by hand in Word.

That's possible, but not a good idea.  Word has numerous problems
with large files, and a typical Frame book would produce a *very*
large Word file.

Nonetheless, if you still feel the need to do it, you can make up
a new Frame document and import by reference all of the files in
your book as insets.  You will lose any differences in master pages,
and your numbering will be continuous, so any use of $chapnum
will not work as expected.  But you can then convert the file to
a single Word file.

I have many outside reviewers who need to review and add comments
electronically, and like it or not, Word is the lingua franca of most of the
world. My reviewers are fine that the pages look a little weird in the Frame
RTF export.

If it's only a little weird, you've done remarkably well!  ;-)

If you want the Word files to look almost exactly like the Frame
files, with features like sideheads and hyperlinks preserved,
have a look at Mif2Go.  There's a free, unlimited demo version at:
  http://www.omsys.com/dcl/download.htm

We're the developers of Mif2Go, so we may be biased g, but we
don't know of any other tool that gives such a close rendering
of Frame files in Word.  In addition, Mif2Go produces top-quality
HTML and XML (including DocBook and DITA), plus numerous Help
formats, from unstructured as well as structured Frame, and can
be fully automated.  It's also fast and inexpensive.

HTH!
-- 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: Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Art Campbell]

You may want to see if MIF2Go will write a FM book file out as a
single .RTF file.
I know it'll process books, but I don't know what the output options are.

At the same time, you may want to make sure that your reviewers can
handle the file in Word, because it's large file / long doc handling
is still one of its big weaknesses. I think it's unlikely that Word
can handle it. About the third or fourth time that Word chokes on it
would be about the time that the reviewers give up, I'd guess.

Also, Acrobat 8 Standard is pretty cheap and available for a
30-day eval And enabling reviews is actually the least of its
review features. Handling and tracking the review comments is more
important, and it excels at that.

Cheers,
Art


On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Tina Ricks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I'd like to export my Frame book (easily) to one giant Word file, and I
  haven't figured out how to do it other than one file at a time, then put
  them back together by hand in Word.



  I have many outside reviewers who need to review and add comments
  electronically, and like it or not, Word is the lingua franca of most of the
  world. My reviewers are fine that the pages look a little weird in the Frame
  RTF export.



  I've been researching the commenting features in Acrobat 8, and I keep
  coming across this statement: Commenting tools are only available in PDFs
  that have commenting enabled. OK. but it looks as if I can't enable
  commenting rights from the PDFs that come out of FM8's File  Save as PDF
  feature (unless I'm missing something). I don't really want to buy full
  Acrobat just for this feature.



  Sending an enormous zip file of little Word documents isn't very efficient
  for the reader on the other end.



  There's no RTF option in File  Save Book As.



-- 
Art Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent
and a redheaded girl. -- Richard Thompson
 No disclaimers apply.
 DoD 358
___


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: question about modification date variable

[Alan Litchfield]

Hi Deirdre,

It seems odd that there is only one date no the Revisions Page. If only one
date is used I would have thought that it would appear on the title page only
and there would be no need for a Revisions Page. From what I have seen you
only have a Revisions Page to list revision dates, revision numbers, and who
validated/verified them.

Assuming what is being done is the latter, then if the date that appears on
each page is the same date as the newest date on the Revisions Page then this
is what I would do:

Part 1;
1. On the Revisions Page, make a table to contain the revision dates, numbers,
names.
2. Create a marker that is put into the table cell that contains the date you
want shown on the body pages.
3. When you need a new date, add a row to the table, type in the information
required and move the marker into the new cell that contains the new date.

Part 2;
1. On the Master pages for the body text pages put a cross reference in the
header/footer that points to the marker on the Revisions Page
2. To update the date in the header/footer use the cross references update
function (depending on whether you are using a book or stand alone file, how
you do it will vary).

By doing this you will need to manually type the new revision date onto the
Revisions Page and move the marker, then update the cross references. But that
is all.

Of course, if you have only one date on that page, then it is easy. Do the
above but you don't need to move the marker to a new cell.

Cheers
Alan

Deirdre Reagan wrote:
 Hi Alan:

 I'm asking because I've never done this before and I don't know how to do it.

 The document is a template.  There's only one date on the Record of
 Revisions, and that date appears as a cross reference on every other
 page.

 Basically, I'm looking at a template and attempting to figure out how
 I would add a revision date on an actual document.

 We've been typing in the revision date manually, but I don't know if
 that's because that's how it's supposed to be done, or if that's
 because the people here aren't using FM to it's full capacity.

 Thanks,

 Deirdre

 On 3/19/08, Alan Litchfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi Deirdre

 Deirdre Reagan wrote:
 
  The date on every single page is a cross reference to the original
  date variable on the Record of Revisions page.  Does that sound right
  to you?

 Logically I would think that the dates on the Revisions Page should reflect
 what are on the individual pages, but that depends on how it is structured.
 Do
 you have a revision number and the date of that revision on the Revisions
 Page
 which matches the most recent date within the document? Or are the revisions
 dated only when a new version is numbered?

 Alternatively, have you got a list of all the pages on the Revisions Page
 and
 the date of their last revision?

 
  I'm asking because I'm wondering how to deal with revisions.  How do I
  modify the date on the pages that have been revised?  Put a
  modification date variable on the Record of Revisions page then
  manually erase the cross-reference on each affected page and insert a
  cross-reference to the Record of Revision modification date variable?
 

 How you do this may depend on what the answer to the above is.

 Cheers
 Alan

 --
 Alan Litchfield MBus (Hons), MNZCS
 AlphaByte
 PO Box 1941, Auckland
 http://www.alphabyte.co.nz





-- 
Alan Litchfield MBus (Hons), MNZCS
AlphaByte
PO Box 1941, Auckland
http://www.alphabyte.co.nz

___


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: Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Tina Ricks]

Thanks for input everyone. It seems that buying Acrobat Pro for the comments
feature is the most stable and the cheapest answer, and my Word-loving
reviewers will have to live with it. If I give them the choice of reviewing
one PDF file with comments vs. 32 separate Word files, they'll choose the
PDF.

 

Tina Ricks

Editor, Trial Guides

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 

___


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: Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Michael O'Neill]

At the risk of confusing the issue, there seems to be a little bit of
conflicting information out there as to what exactly is required to
allow reviews with Adobe Reader.  From
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/acrrfaq.html:

Q. Can I mark up and review files in Adobe Reader?

A. Yes, if this functionality has been rights-enabled by the PDF author.
Adobe Acrobat or Adobe LiveCycle software lets PDF authors turn on
special commenting tools in Adobe Reader on a document-by-document
basis. This capability enables Adobe Reader 7.0 users to easily review
and mark up PDF files with a variety of commenting and markup tools. You
can add sticky notes; indicate text edits; and highlight, cross out, or
underline text. You can also add premade or dynamic stamps.

Q. Can I add comments to a PDF file with Adobe Reader?

A. PDF authors using Adobe LiveCycle(tm) enterprise server and design
software can activate special features in their documents that provide
additional functionality. These enabled Adobe PDF files allow people
with Adobe Reader to save the file to a local hard drive, fill out
forms, add comments and other markups, share it with others, and submit
a completed document electronically. In addition, Adobe PDF files can be
enabled to allow people to digitally sign, certify, and authenticate a
document.

The first answer does _not_ specify that Acrobat Professional is
required to turn on the special commenting tools when the PDF is opened
in Adobe Reader.  The second answer is more specific, requiring Acrobat
Professional or Adobe LiveCycle.  In either case, Acrobat Professional
will do the job...but depending on what you want your reviewers to do
with Adobe Reader, you _may_ be able to get by with a less expensive
version of Acrobat.  
 
-Michael

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tina Ricks
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:09 PM
To: 'Frame Users'
Subject: RE: Export a FM book to single Word file?

Thanks for input everyone. It seems that buying Acrobat Pro for the
comments
feature is the most stable and the cheapest answer, and my Word-loving
reviewers will have to live with it. If I give them the choice of
reviewing
one PDF file with comments vs. 32 separate Word files, they'll choose
the
PDF.

 

Tina Ricks

Editor, Trial Guides

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 

 

___


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/moneill%40meta-comm.
com

Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
___


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: Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Fred Ridder]

Michale O'Neill write (in part):
 
 At the risk of confusing the issue, there seems to be a little bit of
 conflicting information out there as to what exactly is required to
 allow reviews with Adobe Reader. From
 http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/acrrfaq.html:
 
No real confusion except for the fact that the FAQ page clearly has not
been updated since Acrobat 7.0.
 
If you look at the product feature comparison matrix for Acrobat 8.0
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html
you will clearly see that the feature described as:
  Enable Adobe Reader† users to participate in reviews with complete 
  commenting and markup tools, including sticky notes, highlighter, lines, 
  shapes, and stamps
is only supported by the Professional and 3D versions of the Acrobat 
product suite.
 
Fred Ridder
_
Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your 
fix.
http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx
___


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: Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Michael O'Neill]

Sweet.  Just wanted to make sure I didn’t get yelled at for suggesting the most 
expensive option if cheaper alternatives existed.

 

-Michael

 



From: Fred Ridder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 5:23 PM
To: Michael O'Neill; Tina Ricks; Frame Users
Subject: RE: Export a FM book to single Word file?

 

Michale O'Neill write (in part):
 

 At the risk of confusing the issue, there seems to be a little bit of
 conflicting information out there as to what exactly is required to
 allow reviews with Adobe Reader. From
 http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/acrrfaq.html:
 

No real confusion except for the fact that the FAQ page clearly has not
been updated since Acrobat 7.0.
 
If you look at the product feature comparison matrix for Acrobat 8.0
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html
you will clearly see that the feature described as:
  Enable Adobe Reader† users to participate in reviews with complete 
  commenting and markup tools, including sticky notes, highlighter, lines, 
  shapes, and stamps
is only supported by the Professional and 3D versions of the Acrobat 
product suite.
 
Fred Ridder



Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your 
fix. Check it out. http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx 

___


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: Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Art Campbell]

If you want to create stand-alone PDFs that people can mark up with
Reader 8, yes, you do need Pro or 3D.

However, to make things a little less expensive, Standard delivers and
performs the shared review functionality that includes the ability for
reviewers to edit and comment with Reader, as stated on the Adobe
site:

http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html

Pro and 3D are great, but they're not required to conduct shared
reviews with the reviewers using Reader 8. You only need them if you
want to add this functionality outside the review cycle -- for
instance, if you want customers to be able to download and annotate a
PDF that you placed on your www site. But for reviews, if you're
counting pennies, you can pass.

Art

2008/3/20 Michael O'Neill [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Sweet.  Just wanted to make sure I didn't get yelled at for suggesting the 
 most expensive option if cheaper alternatives existed.



  -Michael



  

  From: Fred Ridder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 5:23 PM
  To: Michael O'Neill; Tina Ricks; Frame Users

 Subject: RE: Export a FM book to single Word file?




 Michale O'Neill write (in part):


   At the risk of confusing the issue, there seems to be a little bit of
   conflicting information out there as to what exactly is required to
   allow reviews with Adobe Reader. From
   http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/acrrfaq.html:


  No real confusion except for the fact that the FAQ page clearly has not
  been updated since Acrobat 7.0.

  If you look at the product feature comparison matrix for Acrobat 8.0
  http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html
  you will clearly see that the feature described as:
   Enable Adobe Reader† users to participate in reviews with complete
   commenting and markup tools, including sticky notes, highlighter, lines,
   shapes, and stamps
  is only supported by the Professional and 3D versions of the Acrobat
  product suite.

  Fred Ridder

  

  Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail(R)-get 
 your fix. Check it out. http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx



  ___


  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/art.campbell%40gmail.com

  Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit
  http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.




-- 
Art Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent
and a redheaded girl. -- Richard Thompson
 No disclaimers apply.
 DoD 358
___


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: MadCap Blaze

[quills]

For a product that is supposedly Print oriented, HTML is a lousy 
media to produce it in. There is no reason to use HTML. Even XHTML is 
not the best route, nor is XML. While HTML and XHTML are presentation 
based, they don't allow the same type of easy manipulation that 
FrameMaker or even Word allows.

This just isn't a paradigm that makes sense to me. There isn't an 
output other than html or PDF or XPS. The means to get to your output 
result is laborious and convoluted. This just doesn't seem to be a 
well thought out print solution.

And the beta did not provide me with any real documentation that I 
could view with confidence. Was that a problem with the build?

Scott
___


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: MadCap Blaze

[Sharon Burton]

Vendor post

Forgive me - these are straight questions. I really don't quite understand.

What's convoluted about getting printed output out of XML, HTML, or 
XHTML topics
in Blaze?

You create topics, you define and assign style sheets to topics (you can also
have multiple style sheets in one project and assign them at build time when
you create the output), you create outlines that define the content for the
output, you specify PDF, XPS, or HTML as the output, you output, and you're
done.

What other printed outputs would you want? PDF and XPS seem to be the 
only ones
you can send to a printer for printed books... If your workflow needs you to
also output to Word or Frame, we have that too, but it's not really a print
output, per se.

As to XML, HTML, or XHTML not being the right data format for content, 
it's the
direction the industry is moving. Data in these formats are more 
extendable and
reusable than in a Word format, for example... Pretty much all CMSs, for
example, store data as one of these formats.

We've not found much that you can do in unstructured Frame that you 
can't do in
Blaze. But Blaze does things that Frame can't do, like Smart Cross-references.
[see the docs or our website for what those are but they are very powerful]

As to the docs, we have a 36 page Quick Start Guide and very extensive help
system in the first beta build. This *is* a beta, so we're finishing the docs
during the beta, hopefully using info you guys give us about what else needs
tight docs. We would need to know what are you struggling with that needs more
docs?

Can you help me understand?

Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:


 For a product that is supposedly Print oriented, HTML is a lousy
 media to produce it in. There is no reason to use HTML. Even XHTML is
 not the best route, nor is XML. While HTML and XHTML are presentation
 based, they don't allow the same type of easy manipulation that
 FrameMaker or even Word allows.

 This just isn't a paradigm that makes sense to me. There isn't an
 output other than html or PDF or XPS. The means to get to your output
 result is laborious and convoluted. This just doesn't seem to be a
 well thought out print solution.

 And the beta did not provide me with any real documentation that I
 could view with confidence. Was that a problem with the build?

 Scott


___


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: MadCap Blaze

[William Gaffga]

leading ... kerning ... tracking ... ligatures ... this kinda stuff (and 
more) is something you expect from print. HTML, even with the aid of 
CSS, is not going to be able to give you the control of these that you 
would get from an app designed for print.

Sharon Burton wrote:
 Can you help me understand?
   
___


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: MadCap Blaze

[Sharon Burton]

In fact, we have these features and in fact you have the sort of control - and
in some cases, more control - you expect from an app designed for print. For
example, you also have short line control, missing from FrameMaker.

Really.


Quoting William Gaffga [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 leading ... kerning ... tracking ... ligatures ... this kinda stuff (and
 more) is something you expect from print. HTML, even with the aid of
 CSS, is not going to be able to give you the control of these that you
 would get from an app designed for print.

 Sharon Burton wrote:
 Can you help me understand?



___


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: Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Fred Ridder]

Art Campbell wrote:
 
 If you want to create stand-alone PDFs that people can mark up with
 Reader 8, yes, you do need Pro or 3D.
 
 However, to make things a little less expensive, Standard delivers and
 performs the shared review functionality that includes the ability for
 reviewers to edit and comment with Reader, as stated on the Adobe
 site:
 
 http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html
 
 Pro and 3D are great, but they're not required to conduct shared
 reviews with the reviewers using Reader 8. You only need them if you
 want to add this functionality outside the review cycle -- for
 instance, if you want customers to be able to download and annotate a
 PDF that you placed on your www site. But for reviews, if you're
 counting pennies, you can pass.
 
Sorry, Art, but I think you're misinterpreting the matrix. The shared review
capability that Acrobat Standard supports requires all reviewers to have 
Acrobat and not just Adobe Reader. The minimum version that allows you
to create a PDF that can be annotated by people who have only Adobe
Reader is Acrobat Pro. So you can either buy the Standard version of 
Acrobat for all reviewers, or pop for one copy of Acrobat Pro for the
tech writer preparing docs for review.
 
The Standard version of Acrobat 8.0 simply does not have the Enable 
for Commenting and Analysis in Adobe Reader command.
 
-Fred Ridder
_
Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008
___


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: Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Art Campbell]

I think you're right, Fred.
I looked at a copy of Standard and saw that it had the entry and
assumed it worked the same way that Pro does. But I leaped to the
wrong conclusion.

Thanks,
Art

On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Fred Ridder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Art Campbell wrote:



  If you want to create stand-alone PDFs that people can mark up with
   Reader 8, yes, you do need Pro or 3D.
  
   However, to make things a little less expensive, Standard delivers and
   performs the shared review functionality that includes the ability for
   reviewers to edit and comment with Reader, as stated on the Adobe
   site:
  
   http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html
  
   Pro and 3D are great, but they're not required to conduct shared
   reviews with the reviewers using Reader 8. You only need them if you
   want to add this functionality outside the review cycle -- for
   instance, if you want customers to be able to download and annotate a
   PDF that you placed on your www site. But for reviews, if you're
   counting pennies, you can pass.

  Sorry, Art, but I think you're misinterpreting the matrix. The shared
 review
  capability that Acrobat Standard supports requires all reviewers to have
  Acrobat and not just Adobe Reader. The minimum version that allows you
  to create a PDF that can be annotated by people who have only Adobe
  Reader is Acrobat Pro. So you can either buy the Standard version of
  Acrobat for all reviewers, or pop for one copy of Acrobat Pro for the
  tech writer preparing docs for review.

  The Standard version of Acrobat 8.0 simply does not have the Enable
  for Commenting and Analysis in Adobe Reader command.

  -Fred Ridder

 
 Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. Get it now!



-- 
Art Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent
and a redheaded girl. -- Richard Thompson
 No disclaimers apply.
 DoD 358
___


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: MadCap Blaze

[Hedley Finger]

Sharon:

I concur with Bill.  What I cannot understand is that this was trumpeted as a
FrameMaker killer yet its functionality falls far below.  FM is very 
powerful but
still needs a lot of work.  For one, the presence of so many indexing add-ons
indicates that better indexing and index management needs to be built in.

The Adobe DITA support is woeful; thank god Leximation and Silicon Publishing
are addressing that with their plugin.

At Friday, 21/03/2008, 02:26 AM;, you wrote:
   One of the biggest differences in Blaze - and really, Flare - is that you
   are not authoring long documents, but rather you're authoring 
 topics. Then,
   using Outlines, you put together the topics into the deliverables; for
   example, a User's Guide and an Admin Guide.

Then why didn't you just do DITA from the beginning?  It has a much more
robust model of technical communications documents -- and you can specialise
your own models for specific requirements.  The XHTML-based model is foolish
because you are simply implementing a good old unstructured document
no better than Word, unstructured FrameMaker or Notepad.

One of the bugbears in a team environment is ensuring everyone is using the
same structure and styles/formats appropriately.  You can employ an editor
to ride herd on everybody -- or just implement a DTD or schema which 
automatically
enforces conformance.

   There's nothing to prevent you from authoring just like you do in Word of
   Frame in that you can open a new topic in Blaze and then write a 200 page
   document in one topic. ...

Well, agreed. ... For the record, I've done
topic-based authoring in FrameMaker years ago.

A colleague of mine implements a very DITA-like approach by having 
empty chapter files
in which all the content is imported as text insets.  The equivalent 
of the related-links
element was implemented by putting FM cross-references in the chapter 
document after
each of the topic text-insets.  This ensured the topics were context 
free but the cross-
references were robust.

   I strongly urge you to attend one of my online demos to learn 
 more about the
   paradigm shift for Blaze.

What paradigm shift?  The Madcap team were from 
Bluesky/Robohelp/eHelp, so must
be quite familiar with the topic model.  I don't have a problem with 
quirky GUIs as any IDE
is similar.  In fact, I think a tech. doco app should have an 
interface more like an IDE.

I played around for five minutes.  How do you get to a code view, as 
long as we are in XML?

   As to DITA or CMS,
   check out our just announced product Team Server. It's a 
 workflow management
   tool that's amazing. We have ideas about what it should do but 
 we want your
   input about what you need that tool to do.

I'm confused. Is it a product or is it an idea for a product?

Well, it should allow concurrent checkout, automatic merge on checkin 
if changes don't
clash, and manual compare and merge if changes by different writers 
do clash.  It should
allow branching and merging back to the trunk.  It should allow 
automation so overnight doco
builds can be done.  It should mark topics that have been touched 
since the last release so that
the editor/reviewers/writers don't have to review the entire 
publication.  It should allow staging so
that changes by disgruntled employees are not immediately published 
on to the website.  Etc.

   I'm delighted to answer questions about Blaze or any of our 
 products. If you
   could send those questions to my MadCap email, that would help me a lot.
   [EMAIL PROTECTED], please.

If I come up with any more suggestions, they will be published right 
here.  They will be better
for evaluation and improvement by other list members.

Regards,
Hedley

--
Hedley Stewart Finger
28 Regent Street   Camberwell VIC 3124   Australia
Tel. +61 3 9809 1229   Mobile +61 412 461 558,
E-mail mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

--
Hedley Stewart Finger
28 Regent Street   Camberwell VIC 3124   Australia
Tel. +61 3 9809 1229   Mobile +61 412 461 558,
E-mail mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


___


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: MadCap Blaze

[Hedley Finger]

Sharon:

At Friday, 21/03/2008, 11:07 AM;, you wrote:
you also have short line control, missing from FrameMaker.

Is that the same as widows and orphans?  Or is it when a small word, 
say all, turns over onto a new line at the end of a paragraph?  If 
the latter, in FM most people just put a non-breaking space before 
the word, e.g. \ all, in order to bring the preceding word over 
onto the last line.

Regards,
Hedley


--
Hedley Stewart Finger
28 Regent Street   Camberwell VIC 3124   Australia
Tel. +61 3 9809 1229   Mobile +61 412 461 558,
E-mail mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


___


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.

More like a flicker than a Blaze

[Hedley Finger]

Blaze the FrameMaker killer?  Don't make me laugh.

What about a named style for everything?  What about smart 
cross-references?  What about variables?  What about advanced search 
and replace for anything?  What about diagnostic reports?

XHTML, not even XML.  No DITA.

Adobe will be able to have a good laugh and sink back into its 
customary state of complacency.

Frame killer?  Frame tickler.

And I wanted so much for it to be an advanced XML-based editor with 
CSS3 page layout styling, or even a nifty XSL-FO styler.  Breathe 
easy Arbortext.

Regards,
Hedley

P.S.  But if I want an advanced XHTML editor for my web site, this 
baby will do.


--
Hedley Stewart Finger
28 Regent Street   Camberwell VIC 3124   Australia
Tel. +61 3 9809 1229   Mobile +61 412 461 558,
E-mail 

More like a flicker than a Blaze

[Bill Swallow]

You'd be better off using Flare for that than Blaze.

On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Hedley Finger
 wrote:
>
>  Blaze the FrameMaker killer?  Don't make me laugh.
>
>  P.S.  But if I want an advanced XHTML editor for my web site, this
>  baby will do.

-- 
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager
http://techcommdood.blogspot.com

MadCap Blaze

[Sharon Burton]

Vendor Post

I've been at WritersUA and away from my personal email since Sunday. I got
back late last night. I'm the product manager for Blaze. (BTW - great
conference!)

Some clarifications: Blaze is the younger sister of Flare 4. If you need
complex print and online docs, then you want Flare 4. If you only need
printed output, then you want Blaze. Everything that's in Blaze will be in
Flare 4.

Blaze is a fully featured print authoring and publishing system. It imports
and exports Frame and Word because you may have a workflow that requires you
to import from or export to these formats for some reason. We want to
account for that.

However, you don't *need* to export to Frame to get your output if your
workflow doesn't require that. You can import existing Word or Frame
documents and you're good to go. Then you can directly create PDFs or XPSs
as your deliverables, with the content for those deliverables based on your
Outlines.

Our page design and layout in Blaze is robust so there's no need to export
to Frame if your workflow doesn't require Frame as an output.

One of the biggest differences in Blaze - and really, Flare - is that you
are not authoring long documents, but rather you're authoring topics. Then,
using Outlines, you put together the topics into the deliverables; for
example, a User's Guide and an Admin Guide.

There's nothing to prevent you from authoring just like you do in Word of
Frame in that you can open a new topic in Blaze and then write a 200 page
document in one topic. But by doing that, you lose the power of topic-based
content development that easily allows content reuse across multiple
deliverables for one or more projects.

I strongly urge you to attend one of my online demos to learn more about the
paradigm shift for Blaze. If you are not aware of the shift and just click
Next in the import wizard, you are going to wind up with a mess. I go over
that in the demos. (Don't try to signup for a few hours, as all the
scheduled demos for the next 6 weeks are full and I have to schedule more.
Give me until about 9am Pacific today, please.)

As to our newly announced product Press, it's for glossy print materials,
like Annual reports or other glossy printed material. It's related to our
other products, but it's not the only press solution. As to DITA or CMS,
check out our just announced product Team Server. It's a workflow management
tool that's amazing. We have ideas about what it should do but we want your
input about what you need that tool to do.

I'm delighted to answer questions about Blaze or any of our products. If you
could send those questions to my MadCap email, that would help me a lot.
sburton at madcapsoftware.com, please.

sharon

Sharon Burton
MadCap Software
Product Manager
sburton at madcapsoftware.com
http://madcapsoftware.wordpress.com

MadCap Blaze

[Bill Swallow]

>  Some clarifications: Blaze is the younger sister of Flare 4. If you need
>  complex print and online docs, then you want Flare 4. If you only need
>  printed output, then you want Blaze. Everything that's in Blaze will be in
>  Flare 4.

I really don't understand this, I'm not trying to be difficult... But
if Flare does everything that Blaze does and more, and Flare's been
out for years, why develop Blaze at all? I guess I don't see the point
of spending the time, energy, and money to develop a brand new product
that does a subset of what another of your products already does.

>  One of the biggest differences in Blaze - and really, Flare - is that you
>  are not authoring long documents, but rather you're authoring topics. Then,
>  using Outlines, you put together the topics into the deliverables; for
>  example, a User's Guide and an Admin Guide.

The classic authoring model for FrameMaker is indeed long document
authoring, but it's not so with DITA.

>  There's nothing to prevent you from authoring just like you do in Word of
>  Frame in that you can open a new topic in Blaze and then write a 200 page
>  document in one topic. But by doing that, you lose the power of topic-based
>  content development that easily allows content reuse across multiple
>  deliverables for one or more projects.

Well, agreed. That would be just silly. For the record, I've done
topic-based authoring in FrameMaker years ago. It's all about how you
approach your content structure. I needed to leverage topics in
different documents in different ways, so I just created a new
document for every portable topic. I don't think topic based content
authoring is a revolutionary concept.

>  I strongly urge you to attend one of my online demos to learn more about the
>  paradigm shift for Blaze.

I don't see a paradigm shift at all, but the UI is way different than
what non-Flare users would be accustomed to. But paradigm shift, no.
Topic based authoring is not a new concept.

>  As to DITA or CMS,
>  check out our just announced product Team Server. It's a workflow management
>  tool that's amazing. We have ideas about what it should do but we want your
>  input about what you need that tool to do.

I'm confused. Is it a product or is it an idea for a product?

>  I'm delighted to answer questions about Blaze or any of our products. If you
>  could send those questions to my MadCap email, that would help me a lot.
>  sburton at madcapsoftware.com, please.

I'll keep my questions on the list since that's where they originated.

-- 
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager
http://techcommdood.blogspot.com

MadCap Blaze

[Sharon Burton]

Because some people don't want or need online docs. For example, one of my
former clients was a cash register manufacturer. You can buy their products
for about $100. There is no concept of online help for these products, as
they don't come with a computer. I delivered a PDF of the manual and they
sent that to the printer. They delivered a printed book with the product.

Why should these people purchase a tool that does way more than they need?
Flare 4 is too much for them.

I don't wish to get into the DITA discussion because that's very far afield
from the discussion of the Blaze beta at this moment. If you are currently
doing DITA and you're happy with your tools, then good on you. MadCap will
support DITA in the future. That's all I wish to publicly disclose about our
plans for DITA at this time.

Team Server is being developed right now. I would expect it by the end of
the year. Because we want to know what you want in a product like this, and
because we are developing it right now, now would be the time to talk to us
about what you want in a workflow management tool. We want to build what you
are looking for in this sort of tool. We have ideas but you all know your
workflow needs.

I never said that topic-based authoring is a new concept. But it is a shift
from how most people think about docs. Thus, a discussion of this
development method is relevant. For lots of good info, see JoAnn Hackos's
newest book. She really explains it in detail.

And, yes, our UI is very different. Some people love it, some don't.

sharon

Sharon Burton


-Original Message-
From: Bill Swallow [mailto:techcommd...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 8:26 AM
To: sharon at anthrobytes.com
Cc: Frame Users; Sharon Work
Subject: Re: MadCap Blaze


>  Some clarifications: Blaze is the younger sister of Flare 4. If you need
>  complex print and online docs, then you want Flare 4. If you only need
>  printed output, then you want Blaze. Everything that's in Blaze will be
in
>  Flare 4.

I really don't understand this, I'm not trying to be difficult... But
if Flare does everything that Blaze does and more, and Flare's been
out for years, why develop Blaze at all? I guess I don't see the point
of spending the time, energy, and money to develop a brand new product
that does a subset of what another of your products already does.

>  One of the biggest differences in Blaze - and really, Flare - is that you
>  are not authoring long documents, but rather you're authoring topics.
Then,
>  using Outlines, you put together the topics into the deliverables; for
>  example, a User's Guide and an Admin Guide.

The classic authoring model for FrameMaker is indeed long document
authoring, but it's not so with DITA.

>  There's nothing to prevent you from authoring just like you do in Word of
>  Frame in that you can open a new topic in Blaze and then write a 200 page
>  document in one topic. But by doing that, you lose the power of
topic-based
>  content development that easily allows content reuse across multiple
>  deliverables for one or more projects.

Well, agreed. That would be just silly. For the record, I've done
topic-based authoring in FrameMaker years ago. It's all about how you
approach your content structure. I needed to leverage topics in
different documents in different ways, so I just created a new
document for every portable topic. I don't think topic based content
authoring is a revolutionary concept.

>  I strongly urge you to attend one of my online demos to learn more about
the
>  paradigm shift for Blaze.

I don't see a paradigm shift at all, but the UI is way different than
what non-Flare users would be accustomed to. But paradigm shift, no.
Topic based authoring is not a new concept.

>  As to DITA or CMS,
>  check out our just announced product Team Server. It's a workflow
management
>  tool that's amazing. We have ideas about what it should do but we want
your
>  input about what you need that tool to do.

I'm confused. Is it a product or is it an idea for a product?

>  I'm delighted to answer questions about Blaze or any of our products. If
you
>  could send those questions to my MadCap email, that would help me a lot.
>  sburton at madcapsoftware.com, please.

I'll keep my questions on the list since that's where they originated.

--
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager
http://techcommdood.blogspot.com

Hypertext can't find target doc

[Butler, Darren J CTR USAF AFMC 584 CBSS/GBHAC]

FM.8.0, Windows XP



When using the Hypertext Command "Open Document" and adding the target file 
name to the syntax, I get a "file does not exist error message" and the target 
filename gets truncated. Is there a limit to the filename length?

Hypertext can't find target doc

[Rick Quatro]

Are you using forward slashes in the file path? You need to use forward 
slashes instead of back slashes.

Rick Quatro
Carmen Publishing
585-659-8267
www.frameexpert.com



> FM.8.0, Windows XP
>
>
>
> When using the Hypertext Command "Open Document" and adding the target 
> file name to the syntax, I get a "file does not exist error message" and 
> the target filename gets truncated. Is there a limit to the filename 
> length?
>
> ___
>
>
> You are currently subscribed to Framers as frameexpert at truevine.net.
>
> Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
> or visit 
> http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/frameexpert%40truevine.net
>
> Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
> http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
> 

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Tina Ricks]

I'd like to export my Frame book (easily) to one giant Word file, and I
haven't figured out how to do it other than one file at a time, then put
them back together by hand in Word.



I have many outside reviewers who need to review and add comments
electronically, and like it or not, Word is the lingua franca of most of the
world. My reviewers are fine that the pages look a little weird in the Frame
RTF export.



I've been researching the commenting features in Acrobat 8, and I keep
coming across this statement: "Commenting tools are only available in PDFs
that have commenting enabled." OK. but it looks as if I can't enable
commenting rights from the PDFs that come out of FM8's File > Save as PDF
feature (unless I'm missing something). I don't really want to buy full
Acrobat just for this feature.



Sending an enormous zip file of little Word documents isn't very efficient
for the reader on the other end.



There's no RTF option in File > Save Book As.



Ideas?



Tina Ricks

Editor, Trial Guides

tina at trialguides.com

CGM import to Frame

[Mike Derryberry]

I am attempting to import CGM graphics from Unigraphics to Framemaker  
v 7.2.  Upon import, the graphics are scaled to about 10% of their  
original size and changing the Framemaker import scale settings seems  
to have little effect.  Any suggestions?

Mike 

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Michael O'Neill]

You do need Acrobat Professional in order to save the PDF with
commenting enabled for Adobe Reader.  

-Original Message-
From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
[mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Tina Ricks
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 2:01 PM
To: 'Frame Users'
Subject: Export a FM book to single Word file?

I'd like to export my Frame book (easily) to one giant Word file, and I
haven't figured out how to do it other than one file at a time, then put
them back together by hand in Word.



I have many outside reviewers who need to review and add comments
electronically, and like it or not, Word is the lingua franca of most of
the
world. My reviewers are fine that the pages look a little weird in the
Frame
RTF export.



I've been researching the commenting features in Acrobat 8, and I keep
coming across this statement: "Commenting tools are only available in
PDFs
that have commenting enabled." OK. but it looks as if I can't enable
commenting rights from the PDFs that come out of FM8's File > Save as
PDF
feature (unless I'm missing something). I don't really want to buy full
Acrobat just for this feature.



Sending an enormous zip file of little Word documents isn't very
efficient
for the reader on the other end.



There's no RTF option in File > Save Book As.



Ideas?



Tina Ricks

Editor, Trial Guides

tina at trialguides.com





___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as moneill at meta-comm.com.

Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/moneill%40meta-comm.
com

Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

CGM import to Frame

[Owen, Clint]

Mike,

The CGM import filter comes from another company (Itedo, I think). If
you search the Adobe website for "CGM Graphics" you should find a couple
of articles that will have a link to another site where you can download
the latest version, which might solve your problem.

Clint 


Clint Owen 
Technical Publications
Crane Aerospace & Electronics 
425-743-8674


-Original Message-
From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
[mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Mike
Derryberry
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 6:54 AM
To: framers at lists.frameusers.com
Subject: CGM import to Frame

I am attempting to import CGM graphics from Unigraphics to Framemaker v
7.2.  Upon import, the graphics are scaled to about 10% of their
original size and changing the Framemaker import scale settings seems to
have little effect.  Any suggestions?

Mike 
___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as
Clint.Owen at craneaerospace.com.

Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/clint.owen%40craneae
rospace.com

Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
We value your opinion!  How may we serve you better?
Please click the below survey link to tell us how we are doing.

http://www.craneae.com/surveys/satisfaction.htm

Your feedback is of the utmost importance to us! Thank you for your time!


##
Attention: 
The information contained in this email message may be privileged and is 
confidential information intended only for the use of the recipient, or any 
employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient. Any 
unauthorized use, distribution or copying of this information is strictly 
prohibited and may be unlawful.

If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and destroy the original message and all attachments from your 
electronic files.


This email was scanned and cleared by MailMarshal.
##

delivering XML on the web

[Mollye Barrett]

Dear Framers,

I'm working on a fun project (for an equipment manufacturer) using Frame
to author structured files that may (for a time) be published to PDF as
well as to XML. The XML files will be checked into a CMS and delivered to
the web for dynamic publication based on metadata and/or search.

Is anyone doing the same or something similar? I'm interested your
production path details, information model, lessons learned and, very
soon, navigation in the delivery environment.

I look forward to and appreciate any replies.

Mollye Barrett
ClearPath, LLC
414-331-1378

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Jeremy H. Griffith]

On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 12:00:38 -0700, "Tina Ricks"  
wrote:

>I'd like to export my Frame book (easily) to one giant Word file, and I
>haven't figured out how to do it other than one file at a time, then put
>them back together by hand in Word.

That's possible, but not a good idea.  Word has numerous problems
with large files, and a typical Frame book would produce a *very*
large Word file.

Nonetheless, if you still feel the need to do it, you can make up
a new Frame document and import by reference all of the files in
your book as insets.  You will lose any differences in master pages,
and your numbering will be continuous, so any use of <$chapnum>
will not work as expected.  But you can then convert the file to
a single Word file.

>I have many outside reviewers who need to review and add comments
>electronically, and like it or not, Word is the lingua franca of most of the
>world. My reviewers are fine that the pages look a little weird in the Frame
>RTF export.

If it's only "a little weird", you've done remarkably well!  ;-)

If you want the Word files to look almost exactly like the Frame
files, with features like sideheads and hyperlinks preserved,
have a look at Mif2Go.  There's a free, unlimited demo version at:
  http://www.omsys.com/dcl/download.htm

We're the developers of Mif2Go, so we may be biased , but we
don't know of any other tool that gives such a close rendering
of Frame files in Word.  In addition, Mif2Go produces top-quality
HTML and XML (including DocBook and DITA), plus numerous Help
formats, from unstructured as well as structured Frame, and can
be fully automated.  It's also fast and inexpensive.

HTH!
-- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc.
http://www.omsys.com/

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Art Campbell]

You may want to see if MIF2Go will write a FM book file out as a
single .RTF file.
I know it'll process books, but I don't know what the output options are.

At the same time, you may want to make sure that your reviewers can
handle the file in Word, because it's large file / long doc handling
is still one of its big weaknesses. I think it's unlikely that Word
can handle it. About the third or fourth time that Word chokes on it
would be about the time that the reviewers give up, I'd guess.

Also, Acrobat 8 Standard is pretty cheap and available for a
30-day eval And enabling reviews is actually the least of its
review features. Handling and tracking the review comments is more
important, and it excels at that.

Cheers,
Art


On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Tina Ricks  
wrote:
> I'd like to export my Frame book (easily) to one giant Word file, and I
>  haven't figured out how to do it other than one file at a time, then put
>  them back together by hand in Word.
>
>
>
>  I have many outside reviewers who need to review and add comments
>  electronically, and like it or not, Word is the lingua franca of most of the
>  world. My reviewers are fine that the pages look a little weird in the Frame
>  RTF export.
>
>
>
>  I've been researching the commenting features in Acrobat 8, and I keep
>  coming across this statement: "Commenting tools are only available in PDFs
>  that have commenting enabled." OK. but it looks as if I can't enable
>  commenting rights from the PDFs that come out of FM8's File > Save as PDF
>  feature (unless I'm missing something). I don't really want to buy full
>  Acrobat just for this feature.
>
>
>
>  Sending an enormous zip file of little Word documents isn't very efficient
>  for the reader on the other end.
>
>
>
>  There's no RTF option in File > Save Book As.
>
>

-- 
Art Campbell art.campbell at gmail.com
 "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent
and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson
 No disclaimers apply.
 DoD 358

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Tina Ricks]

Thanks for input everyone. It seems that buying Acrobat Pro for the comments
feature is the most stable and the cheapest answer, and my Word-loving
reviewers will have to live with it. If I give them the choice of reviewing
one PDF file with comments vs. 32 separate Word files, they'll choose the
PDF.



Tina Ricks

Editor, Trial Guides

tina at trialguides.com

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Michael O'Neill]

At the risk of confusing the issue, there seems to be a little bit of
conflicting information out there as to what exactly is required to
allow reviews with Adobe Reader.  From
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/acrrfaq.html:

Q. Can I mark up and review files in Adobe Reader?

A. Yes, if this functionality has been rights-enabled by the PDF author.
Adobe Acrobat or Adobe LiveCycle software lets PDF authors turn on
special commenting tools in Adobe Reader on a document-by-document
basis. This capability enables Adobe Reader 7.0 users to easily review
and mark up PDF files with a variety of commenting and markup tools. You
can add sticky notes; indicate text edits; and highlight, cross out, or
underline text. You can also add premade or dynamic stamps.

Q. Can I add comments to a PDF file with Adobe Reader?

A. PDF authors using Adobe LiveCycle(tm) enterprise server and design
software can activate special features in their documents that provide
additional functionality. These enabled Adobe PDF files allow people
with Adobe Reader to save the file to a local hard drive, fill out
forms, add comments and other markups, share it with others, and submit
a completed document electronically. In addition, Adobe PDF files can be
enabled to allow people to digitally sign, certify, and authenticate a
document.

The first answer does _not_ specify that Acrobat Professional is
required to turn on the special commenting tools when the PDF is opened
in Adobe Reader.  The second answer is more specific, requiring "Acrobat
Professional or Adobe LiveCycle".  In either case, Acrobat Professional
will do the job...but depending on what you want your reviewers to do
with Adobe Reader, you _may_ be able to get by with a less expensive
version of Acrobat.  

-Michael

-Original Message-
From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com
[mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Tina Ricks
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 4:09 PM
To: 'Frame Users'
Subject: RE: Export a FM book to single Word file?

Thanks for input everyone. It seems that buying Acrobat Pro for the
comments
feature is the most stable and the cheapest answer, and my Word-loving
reviewers will have to live with it. If I give them the choice of
reviewing
one PDF file with comments vs. 32 separate Word files, they'll choose
the
PDF.



Tina Ricks

Editor, Trial Guides

tina at trialguides.com





___


You are currently subscribed to Framers as moneill at meta-comm.com.

Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
or visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/moneill%40meta-comm.
com

Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Fred Ridder]

Michale O'Neill write (in part):

> At the risk of confusing the issue, there seems to be a little bit of
> conflicting information out there as to what exactly is required to
> allow reviews with Adobe Reader. From
> http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/acrrfaq.html:

No real confusion except for the fact that the FAQ page clearly has not
been updated since Acrobat 7.0.

If you look at the product feature comparison matrix for Acrobat 8.0
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html
you will clearly see that the feature described as:
  Enable Adobe Reader? users to participate in reviews with complete 
  commenting and markup tools, including sticky notes, highlighter, lines, 
  shapes, and stamps
is only supported by the Professional and 3D versions of the Acrobat 
product suite.

Fred Ridder
_
Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail?-get your 
"fix".
http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Michael O'Neill]

Sweet.  Just wanted to make sure I didn?t get yelled at for suggesting the most 
expensive option if cheaper alternatives existed.



-Michael





From: Fred Ridder [mailto:docu...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 5:23 PM
To: Michael O'Neill; Tina Ricks; Frame Users
Subject: RE: Export a FM book to single Word file?



Michale O'Neill write (in part):


> At the risk of confusing the issue, there seems to be a little bit of
> conflicting information out there as to what exactly is required to
> allow reviews with Adobe Reader. From
> http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/acrrfaq.html:


No real confusion except for the fact that the FAQ page clearly has not
been updated since Acrobat 7.0.

If you look at the product feature comparison matrix for Acrobat 8.0
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html
you will clearly see that the feature described as:
  Enable Adobe Reader? users to participate in reviews with complete 
  commenting and markup tools, including sticky notes, highlighter, lines, 
  shapes, and stamps
is only supported by the Professional and 3D versions of the Acrobat 
product suite.

Fred Ridder



Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail?-get your 
"fix". Check it out.  

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Art Campbell]

If you want to create stand-alone PDFs that people can mark up with
Reader 8, yes, you do need Pro or 3D.

However, to make things a little less expensive, Standard delivers and
performs the shared review functionality that includes the ability for
reviewers to edit and comment with Reader, as stated on the Adobe
site:

http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html

Pro and 3D are great, but they're not required to conduct shared
reviews with the reviewers using Reader 8. You only need them if you
want to add this functionality outside the review cycle -- for
instance, if you want customers to be able to download and annotate a
PDF that you placed on your www site. But for reviews, if you're
counting pennies, you can pass.

Art

2008/3/20 Michael O'Neill :
> Sweet.  Just wanted to make sure I didn't get yelled at for suggesting the 
> most expensive option if cheaper alternatives existed.
>
>
>
>  -Michael
>
>
>
>  
>
>  From: Fred Ridder [mailto:docudoc at hotmail.com]
>  Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2008 5:23 PM
>  To: Michael O'Neill; Tina Ricks; Frame Users
>
> Subject: RE: Export a FM book to single Word file?
>
>
>
>
> Michale O'Neill write (in part):
>
>
>  > At the risk of confusing the issue, there seems to be a little bit of
>  > conflicting information out there as to what exactly is required to
>  > allow reviews with Adobe Reader. From
>  > http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/acrrfaq.html:
>
>
>  No real confusion except for the fact that the FAQ page clearly has not
>  been updated since Acrobat 7.0.
>
>  If you look at the product feature comparison matrix for Acrobat 8.0
>  http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html
>  you will clearly see that the feature described as:
>   Enable Adobe Reader? users to participate in reviews with complete
>   commenting and markup tools, including sticky notes, highlighter, lines,
>   shapes, and stamps
>  is only supported by the Professional and 3D versions of the Acrobat
>  product suite.
>
>  Fred Ridder
>
>  
>
>  Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail(R)-get 
> your "fix". Check it out. 
>
>
>
>  ___
>
>
>  You are currently subscribed to Framers as art.campbell at gmail.com.
>
>  Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com.
>
>  To unsubscribe send a blank email to
>  framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com
>  or visit 
> http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/art.campbell%40gmail.com
>
>  Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit
>  http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
>



-- 
Art Campbell art.campbell at gmail.com
 "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent
and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson
 No disclaimers apply.
 DoD 358

MadCap Blaze

[qui...@airmail.net]

For a product that is supposedly Print oriented, HTML is a lousy 
media to produce it in. There is no reason to use HTML. Even XHTML is 
not the best route, nor is XML. While HTML and XHTML are presentation 
based, they don't allow the same type of easy manipulation that 
FrameMaker or even Word allows.

This just isn't a paradigm that makes sense to me. There isn't an 
output other than html or PDF or XPS. The means to get to your output 
result is laborious and convoluted. This just doesn't seem to be a 
well thought out print solution.

And the beta did not provide me with any real documentation that I 
could view with confidence. Was that a problem with the build?

Scott

MadCap Blaze

[Sharon Burton]

Vendor post

Forgive me - these are straight questions. I really don't quite understand.

What's convoluted about getting printed output out of XML, HTML, or 
XHTML topics
in Blaze?

You create topics, you define and assign style sheets to topics (you can also
have multiple style sheets in one project and assign them at build time when
you create the output), you create outlines that define the content for the
output, you specify PDF, XPS, or HTML as the output, you output, and you're
done.

What other printed outputs would you want? PDF and XPS seem to be the 
only ones
you can send to a printer for printed books... If your workflow needs you to
also output to Word or Frame, we have that too, but it's not really a print
output, per se.

As to XML, HTML, or XHTML not being the right data format for content, 
it's the
direction the industry is moving. Data in these formats are more 
extendable and
reusable than in a Word format, for example... Pretty much all CMSs, for
example, store data as one of these formats.

We've not found much that you can do in unstructured Frame that you 
can't do in
Blaze. But Blaze does things that Frame can't do, like Smart Cross-references.
[see the docs or our website for what those are but they are very powerful]

As to the docs, we have a 36 page Quick Start Guide and very extensive help
system in the first beta build. This *is* a beta, so we're finishing the docs
during the beta, hopefully using info you guys give us about what else needs
tight docs. We would need to know what are you struggling with that needs more
docs?

Can you help me understand?

Quoting quills at airmail.net:

>
> For a product that is supposedly Print oriented, HTML is a lousy
> media to produce it in. There is no reason to use HTML. Even XHTML is
> not the best route, nor is XML. While HTML and XHTML are presentation
> based, they don't allow the same type of easy manipulation that
> FrameMaker or even Word allows.
>
> This just isn't a paradigm that makes sense to me. There isn't an
> output other than html or PDF or XPS. The means to get to your output
> result is laborious and convoluted. This just doesn't seem to be a
> well thought out print solution.
>
> And the beta did not provide me with any real documentation that I
> could view with confidence. Was that a problem with the build?
>
> Scott

MadCap Blaze

[William Gaffga]

leading ... kerning ... tracking ... ligatures ... this kinda stuff (and 
more) is something you expect from "print". HTML, even with the aid of 
CSS, is not going to be able to give you the control of these that you 
would get from an app designed for "print".

Sharon Burton wrote:
> Can you help me understand?
>   

MadCap Blaze

[Sharon Burton]

In fact, we have these features and in fact you have the sort of control - and
in some cases, more control - you expect from an app designed for "print". For
example, you also have short line control, missing from FrameMaker.

Really.


Quoting William Gaffga :

> leading ... kerning ... tracking ... ligatures ... this kinda stuff (and
> more) is something you expect from "print". HTML, even with the aid of
> CSS, is not going to be able to give you the control of these that you
> would get from an app designed for "print".
>
> Sharon Burton wrote:
>> Can you help me understand?
>>

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Fred Ridder]

Art Campbell wrote:

> If you want to create stand-alone PDFs that people can mark up with
> Reader 8, yes, you do need Pro or 3D.
> 
> However, to make things a little less expensive, Standard delivers and
> performs the shared review functionality that includes the ability for
> reviewers to edit and comment with Reader, as stated on the Adobe
> site:
> 
> http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html
> 
> Pro and 3D are great, but they're not required to conduct shared
> reviews with the reviewers using Reader 8. You only need them if you
> want to add this functionality outside the review cycle -- for
> instance, if you want customers to be able to download and annotate a
> PDF that you placed on your www site. But for reviews, if you're
> counting pennies, you can pass.

Sorry, Art, but I think you're misinterpreting the matrix. The shared review
capability that Acrobat Standard supports requires all reviewers to have 
Acrobat and not just Adobe Reader. The minimum version that allows you
to create a PDF that can be annotated by people who have only Adobe
Reader is Acrobat Pro. So you can either buy the Standard version of 
Acrobat for all reviewers, or pop for one copy of Acrobat Pro for the
tech writer preparing docs for review.

The Standard version of Acrobat 8.0 simply does not have the "Enable 
for Commenting and Analysis in Adobe Reader" command.

-Fred Ridder
_
Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008

Export a FM book to single Word file?

[Art Campbell]

I think you're right, Fred.
I looked at a copy of Standard and saw that it had the entry and
assumed it worked the same way that Pro does. But I leaped to the
wrong conclusion.

Thanks,
Art

On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Fred Ridder  wrote:
>
>  Art Campbell wrote:
>
>
>
> > If you want to create stand-alone PDFs that people can mark up with
>  > Reader 8, yes, you do need Pro or 3D.
>  >
>  > However, to make things a little less expensive, Standard delivers and
>  > performs the shared review functionality that includes the ability for
>  > reviewers to edit and comment with Reader, as stated on the Adobe
>  > site:
>  >
>  > http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/matrix.html
>  >
>  > Pro and 3D are great, but they're not required to conduct shared
>  > reviews with the reviewers using Reader 8. You only need them if you
>  > want to add this functionality outside the review cycle -- for
>  > instance, if you want customers to be able to download and annotate a
>  > PDF that you placed on your www site. But for reviews, if you're
>  > counting pennies, you can pass.
>
>  Sorry, Art, but I think you're misinterpreting the matrix. The shared
> review
>  capability that Acrobat Standard supports requires all reviewers to have
>  Acrobat and not just Adobe Reader. The minimum version that allows you
>  to create a PDF that can be annotated by people who have only Adobe
>  Reader is Acrobat Pro. So you can either buy the Standard version of
>  Acrobat for all reviewers, or pop for one copy of Acrobat Pro for the
>  tech writer preparing docs for review.
>
>  The Standard version of Acrobat 8.0 simply does not have the "Enable
>  for Commenting and Analysis in Adobe Reader" command.
>
>  -Fred Ridder
>
> 
> Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. Get it now!



-- 
Art Campbell art.campbell at gmail.com
 "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent
and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson
 No disclaimers apply.
 DoD 358