FrameMaker graphic counter question
(FM 8.0 on an HP Pavilion with Windows Vista) And yet another question for Framers. My TOC problem "seems" to be taken care of, and the transparent background for graphics question is on the back burner because now there's another "hot" issue: page appearance. The company (a heavy equipment manufacturer from Asia) is just getting a foothold here in the U.S. and is very finicky about how the manuals should look, as they should be. A typical page layout in an operator manual has text at the left side of the page column and corresponding line art (or photo) image to its right in an anchored frame that is right- aligned. Easy enough. You've all seen and worked with this layout I'm sure. But now, one of the execs here saw how in a competitor's manual, not only is there a small ID number just inside the lower right corner of each graphic (which we also do), but also another number which specifies the section and numerical sequence of each graphic; this number is outside the graphic frame and at the lower left. I believe that it's useless because to most everybody else on the planet, the graphic obviously applies to the numerical step to its direct left. If an equipment operator is on the phone with someone, I can guarantee that he (or she) will say, "Step 3 on page 3-56 says to do this and even shows how it should look." No one is going to say, "Step 3 says to do this, and graphic 3-76 shows it." In any event, I aim to please so I'm spending lots of time trying to see how to best come up with a way to do this with as little impact as possible on timing. Each graphic is 2.75 in. wide (height varies). So far, I've completed a sample chapter with a new paragraph tag called "Section Graphic Counter" and set it at 10-pt Arial, right-aligned at 2.6 inches from the right side of the page. It uses the section number and will count upwards automatrically. Again, so far so good. But problems occur when there is so much vertical text to the left of the graphic that I can't enter a hard return and tag that line as "Section Graphic Counter". And sometimes, the height of the graphic is such that even if there is space for a hard return, the resulting Section Graphic Counter Number is either too far below the graphic frame box or right against its side. So the question becomes is there a rather simple way to generate this number and position it consistently outside the lower left bottom corner of each anchored graphic frame and not have to worry about explanatory text at the left side of the page interfering? -- Kenpo in Atlanta
TOC not what should be
Hey all, (FM8.0 on an HP Pavilion pc) I'm having no success in generating a book TOC where each line entry includes the topic (either level 1 or level 2), followed by a tabbed dot leader, followed by the "chapnum", then a dash and then the "pagenum", like this: BLAH-BLAH LEVEL 1 1-3 BLAH-BLAH LEVEL 2 .1-4 The chapnum and pagenum were set up in each of the chapter master page footers via Format > Headers, Insert page# and Insert other > Chapter Number with a dash in between (as shown above) With the book file and all chapters opened, Format > Document > Numbering and "1" was selected for the first chapter and Continue Numbering from Previous File in Book was used for the subsequent chapters. Then at the book level, it's Format > Add Table of Contents, then moving only the Section Title, Topic Level 1 and Topic Level 2 from the "Don't Include" box to the "Include Paragraphs Tagged" box (the TOC is set to be placed right after the book's title page and before the first chapter). In the Update Book dialog box, all checkboxes are checked and I click "Update" to generate the file. The resultant file is in Times Roman with a space and a single page number for everything. BLAH-BLAH 1 (displays as the paragraph for Topic Level 1TOC) BLAH-BLAH 2 (displays as the paragraph for Topic Level 2TOC) After using paragraph designer to "Update all" with a Arial font, then a 6.9 in. right-aligned tab with dot leader, I check the reference page, and set the Topic Level 1TOC entry to <$paratext>.<$chaptnum>-<$pagenum> and the Topic Level 2TOC entry to <$paratext>..<$chaptnum>-<$pagenum> What I get is this: BLAH-BLAH LEVEL 1 3 BLAH-BLAH LEVEL 2 .4 I've checked and doublechecked my settings and even consulted chapter 12 of my printout of the official FM 8.0 manual (what a doosy). Nothing seems amiss, but still it's just not working. -- Kenpo in Atlanta
TOC not what should be
Disregard the misspellings in my explanation: chaptnum is really chapnum. -- Kenpo -- Original message from poshedly at bellsouth.net: -- Hey all, (FM8.0 on an HP Pavilion pc) I'm having no success in generating a book TOC where each line entry includes the topic (either level 1 or level 2), followed by a tabbed dot leader, followed by the "chapnum", then a dash and then the "pagenum", like this: BLAH-BLAH LEVEL 1 1-3 BLAH-BLAH LEVEL 2 .1-4 The chapnum and pagenum were set up in each of the chapter master page footers via Format > Headers, Insert page# and Insert other > Chapter Number with a dash in between (as shown above) With the book file and all chapters opened, Format > Document > Numbering and "1" was selected for the first chapter and Continue Numbering from Previous File in Book was used for the subsequent chapters. Then at the book level, it's Format > Add Table of Contents, then moving only the Section Title, Topic Level 1 and Topic Level 2 from the "Don't Include" box to the "Include Paragraphs Tagged" box (the TOC is set to be placed right after the book's title page and before the first chapter). In the Update Book dialog box, all checkboxes are checked and I click "Update" to generate the file. The resultant file is in Times Roman with a space and a single page number for everything. BLAH-BLAH 1 (displays as the paragraph for Topic Level 1TOC) BLAH-BLAH 2 (displays as the paragraph for Topic Level 2TOC) After using paragraph designer to "Update all" with a Arial font, then a 6.9 in. right-aligned tab with dot leader, I check the reference page, and set the Topic Level 1TOC entry to <$paratext>.<$chaptnum>-<$pagenum> and the Topic Level 2TOC entry to <$paratext>..<$chaptnum>-<$pagenum> What I get is this: BLAH-BLAH LEVEL 1 3 BLAH-BLAH LEVEL 2 .4 I've checked and doublechecked my settings and even consulted chapter 12 of my printout of the official FM 8.0 manual (what a doosy). Nothing seems amiss, but still it's just not working. -- Kenpo in Atlanta
pulling an image from an FM file
Thank ye, Clint -- that's what I'll try this morning. And from all the good words I've seen about Mif2go, I have a feeling that'll also be on my wish-list. -- Kenpo in Atlanta -- Original message from "Owen, Clint" : -- > Ken, > > 1. Convert the FM file to PDF, using settings that will not degrade the > embedded image. > > 2. Extract the page with the target image into a separate PDF. > > 3. Import the PDF with the target image into any graphic program that > can read PDF, such as Adobe Illustrator or Corel Designer. > > 4. Use the graphic tool to delete the text, headers, footers, etc. from > around the image. > > 5. Export the image in your preferred format. > > This method also works to recover images embedded in Word documents. > > Clint > > Clint Owen > Technical Publications > Crane Aerospace & Electronics > 425-743-8674 > > > -Original Message- > From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com > [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Ken Poshedly > Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 6:13 PM > To: framers at lists.frameusers.com > Subject: pulling an image from an FM file > > I could have sworn I saw this mentioned here at at least one time in the > past, but don't remember how long ago, but how to extract -- if > possible-- an embedded image from an FM file. (This is what I was given > to work with.) > > It's either do that, edit it and then re-import it or ele scan in a > hardcopy and save it as tif and go from there. > > -- Kenpo in Atlanta on a Sunday night
Large FM File
I also have had problem-FrameMaker files where the author at the home office in Europe forgot to embed the images files before sending me the FM file. The result was lost time and effort. And to make matters worse, they sometimes sent me the image files themselves for me to embed, but the company uses identical names for images files used in different books. So when I placed images files in a directory common to a "family" of books, I unknowingly overwrote previous image files that were totally different. This was finally caught before final printing, but it was -- and still is -- a pain in the butt. And yes, I've tried to set them (the home office) straight with alternative ways to name images file, but no luck yet. Thus, large FM files with embedded images are best for my particular use. -- Kenpo in Atlanta -- Original message from ?sa Johansson : -- > I can only think of one thing and that is that our localisation cost would > drop > if we only had one big file instead of several. This is because the tool our > localisation company uses for analysing 100% matches cannot handle book > files, > only individual files. That means that if the file name changes or text is > moved > from one file to another (which happens quite a lot with our files > unfortunately), the tool can no longer identify the text as previously > translated and therefore the translator has to review the text again and > charge > for it. The cost for reviewing the 100% matches can be very high. > > But I guess it is a better idea to stop changing file names and moving around > text than merging all FM files into one. ;-) > > /?sa > > > > > -- > > > > Message: 5 > > Date: Thu, 1 May 2008 14:32:50 -0400 > > From: "Neil Tubb" > > Subject: Large FM File > > To: > > Message-ID: > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > Just a quick question- can anyone tell me why putting your entire 300+ > > page manual into one FM file would make sense? I was always taught that > > splitting it out one file per chapter was the safest and best way to go, > > but I've just seen an example of the one large file approach. Does > > anyone else do this? Just curious. > > > > > > > > Neil > > > > > _ > News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now! > http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx > ___ > > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as poshedly at bellsouth.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/poshedly%40bellsouth.net > > Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit > http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Printing of Paragraph Design Information
Thanks Mike, I'll lok into it. -- Ken in Atlanta (Tornado Capital of the Southeast -- at least last weekend) -- Original message from "Mike Wickham" : -- > > Anything similar for printing out master page characteristics (object > > properties, etc.)? > > Systec's Format List lists "Page Layout" properties that include page size, > whether double-sided or right 1st page, and column layout info that includes > column, sidehead, and margin settings. The plugin also list system and user > variables, and cross-reference formats. > > Silicon Prairie Software's Master Page Tools plugin can list the master > pages that are used in each document. > > Mike Wickham > >
FrameMaker doc "attributes" report
It's been awhile since I tried this, but isn't there a way to get a printout of the attrubutes of a FrameMaker document (especially the master page frame object dimensions). I think the Paragraph Tools plug-in will give me the paragraph attributes stuff, ut I really need the various object properties data on the master pages. It's either a plug-in of some kind or else do a screen shot and hand-write on it what's what. -- Kenpo in Atlanta
Acrobat / FrameMaker conflicts during install
My client company just went ahead and bit the bullet and forked out around $800 or so for FrameMaker 8.0. (Does this mean that Frame 9.0 will be $900, Frame 10.0 will be $1,000, etc, etc?). We also bought Acrobat Professional 8.0 as well. I want to do a ?clean? installation but before I do, I have some concerns because of what is on the terminal that I ?inherited? (with Windows XP Office and the service packs, etc.). It already has on it the folders (and their subfolders) ? but NOT the executable application files ? for Acrobat 6.0 and 7.0. Without the executable files, I can?t do an uninstall via Control Panel. So apparently, my only option is to simply do what you?re NOT supposed to do ? just delete the Acrobat 6.0 and 7.0 folders. Ooh, but that grates on me because I fear that bits and pieces of either or both Acrobats are already strewn hither and thither throughout the Windows XP operating system and will cause problems later on down the line. Or not. (Remember the good old days, when a program was all in one folder, I mean ?directory?? Hah! We?ll never see THAT stuff again.) I already found out the hard way how nice and courteous (NOT!!) one Acrobat program is to another after first installing FrameMaker 8.0 (along with its PDFMaker feature) and then NOT being able to install Acrobat 8.0 afterwards. (I kept getting a message after the Acrobat 8.0 setup procedure was well into progress that ?Setup has detected that you already have a more functional product installed. Setup will now terminate.?) So I uninstalled FM8.0 and its plug-ins and the Acrobat 8.0 install moved along much further than before (I had to cancel it, however, until my IT guy gets in here with the serial number). So with FM8.0 and Acrobat8.0 currently off the drive, what to do about the previously installed Acrobat 6.0 and 7.0 folders in light of their missing executable application files. Just delete them and proceed with the Acrobat 8.0 and then FM 8.0 installations? BTW, the Adobe docs really play up the purchased support plans (even for ?defective products?), leading me to believe that free telephone support for initial setup is no more. But somewhere, I did find that there apparently is 90-day free phone support for initial setup problems. Am I correct on this? -- Ken in Atlanta
radical revamping of techpubs
At the civil engineering firm where my wife has been one of the transportation engineers for almost 20 years, the story is pretty much the same. That is, the engineers are pretty proficient at road design and all that goes into it, but their reports (such as Interstate Justification Reports, or "IJR's", for instance) simply grate on me when I review a draft copy for my wife. While it's very true that this or that 30 or 40 page report -- complete with graphs, charts and maps -- will hardly be looked at, no one seems to remember the old adage, "If the job is worth doing, it's worth doing right." They figure that not even another engineer is going to look at this stuff. Probably the only things I see correctly presented within the reports are the tech specs. But the rules of grammar, punctuation and presentation simply fly out the window when these babies are assembled before I get one to look at. Luckily, the ones my wife do are each an improvement over the previous ones. The firm has no one dedicated to tech writing / tech editing on staff. I've approached the firm about reviewing their reports on a contract basis, but they're not interested -- yet. -- Ken in Atlanta -- Original message from "Flato, Gillian" : -- > This will be a complete train wreck. > > Here's why: > > 1. The Developers have no idea how to organize the information > 2. When they write, they are completely illiterate. > In my company, the Developers write specs for me on each new > feature. They are so illiterate, that I always have to go to them and > interview them to figure out what the feature actually does. > 3. Their knowledge is so advanced that they don't understand the > end-users viewpoint > I can't tell you how many times I have heard, "You don't have to > explain that, they'll know how to do that." I have had to point out > countless times that my audience is an end-user new on the job who knows > nothing and I have to explain everything to him. > > You're company may be looking at this because some number cruncher > thinks it will save money, but the real cost will be a severe drop in > quality, which will cause you to lose customers, lose sales, lose > revenue etc. etc. > > > Thank you, > > > Gillian Flato > Technical Writer (Software) > nanometrics > 1550 Buckeye Dr. > Milpitas, CA. 95035 > 408.545.6316 > 408.232.5911 > gflato at nanometrics.com > > > -Original Message- > From: framers-bounces+gflato=nanometrics.com at lists.frameusers.com > [mailto:framers-bounces+gflato=nanometrics.com at lists.frameusers.com] On > Behalf Of Susan Modlin > Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 2:42 PM > To: mulholland4; framers at lists.frameusers.com > Subject: Re: radical revamping of techpubs > > Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me -- at least as far as the > customer is concerned. Although the company might enjoy a short-term > savings, they'll pay for it in the longer term in increased support > costs (unless they off-shore that too) and customer dissatisfaction. > > ...Susan > > - Original Message > From: mulholland4 > To: framers at lists.frameusers.com > Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 12:54:37 PM > Subject: radical revamping of techpubs > > > Hi, > I would like to see what the group thinks of this scenario for writing > documentation within a company? > > 1. Remove all existing tech writing staff from techpubs. > 2. Replace these with software developers and specialists who know the > software inside out and get them to write all of the documentation. > These > would now be known as Developer-techwriters. (It should be noted that > none > of these people has English as a first language, despite this being the > primary market for the documentation.) > 3. Hire editing staff to edit only the language and grammar of the > documents > written by the software specialists. > > The reasoning behind this scenario is; that this saves money as the > developers know the software, and it is really cheap to get university > students to come in and edit. > > I won't make comments on this just now as i'm sure there are many of us > who > just want to run screaming! > > thanks > Mulholland > ___ > > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as smodlin at yahoo.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/smodlin%40yahoo.com > > Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit > http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. > > > > > > > > > > Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. > http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/ >
Adobe PrintMe Gone Away?
The subject line says (asks) it all. I had a few spare(?) minutes and chanced upon this nice litle thingy. But after completing the signup fields, it comes back with "Creating user accounts is no longer allowed." Boo-hoo. -- Ken in Atlanta
Adobe PrintMe Gone Away?
Dov, You're oh-so-right. But 'twas a good idea. Oh well . . . Thanks, -- Kenpo in Atlanta -- Original message from "Dov Isaacs" : -- > Actually, there is/was no such thing as "Adobe PrintMe"! > > I assume of course that you are referring to the function > that WAS in Acrobat 6 and 7 for printing. > > That was actually a function provided by EFI (Electronics > for Imaging) that allowed you to access printers on their > internet-based network of EFI-managed printers. Adobe provided > the button, but had no other involvement in that feature. It > is not supported in Acrobat 8. > > - Dov > > > -Original Message- > > From: poshedly at bellsouth.net > > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 6:42 AM > > To: framers > > Subject: Adobe PrintMe Gone Away? > > > > The subject line says (asks) it all. > > > > I had a few spare(?) minutes and chanced upon this nice litle thingy. > But after completing the signup > > fields, it comes back with "Creating user accounts is no longer > allowed." > > > > Boo-hoo. > > > > -- Ken in Atlanta
