I have a client who has just been acquired. They want me to rebrand their
technical documentation (currently in Word) to comply with their new brand. I
suggested FrameMaker, but they are pushing Quark. I alway thought of Quark as
more appropriate for designers that do brochures, etc.
Has
Actually that is not strictly correct. There are a wide range of
variables that can be used in QXP for number of defined purposes and
if you are using Quark Tags (somewhat similar in its execution to MIF)
the range is much wider. However the functionality built into it is
not as extensive as
On Linda Lecomte at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 11/30/07 8:36 AM:
Thanks David. This was helpful and I probably will have more questions. I do
have two right now:
What do you mean by Quark does not do numbered lists or footnotes natively.
Also, is outsourcing this project to you an option. I
I love Quark and InDesign, and learned to like PageMaker too back in
the day, but these are desktop publishing applications. They are for
creating layouts.
FrameMaker, on the other hand, is a document management tool. It's
better for authoring, in my view. Microsoft Word is a kind of hybrid
that
Doug wrote:
In my experience the true test is whether the rules print
normally...Acrobat has a reputation for not being able to draw lines
well. If the hardcopy is fine, just ignore the inconsistent ruling.
Just to clarify: Acrobat's problems with line widths is on-screen
only, and it all
We've used both Quark and FrameMaker. My colleague, a diehard Quark
user, has agreed that for the documents we are creating (user manuals
for medical devices) FrameMaker is the better way to go. Quark does not
seem to have features for creating books which makes making a global
change in the
Rick,
The only way I've ever done it is to use the generic click notification, then
test the active document to see if it is the Structure View. The test I use
looks for Structure View in the title bar, which I know isn't completely
reliable in all instances. Something like this, inside of
Loretta,
What you are probably seeing is a result of the screen - sometimes the
line triggers one row of pixels and sometimes two, making it look thicker.
When you increase the magnification all lines trigger two (or more rows)
and look the same.
If you move the image around on the screen do
As noted, Quark is really a designing application and not really meant for
writing documentation. We tried using it in my organization, but found that it
couldn't handle large manuals very well it crashed everytime we tried to
generate a TOC Index,
--
-Original
In my experience the true test is whether the rules print
normally...Acrobat has a reputation for not being able to draw lines
well. If the hardcopy is fine, just ignore the inconsistent ruling.
--Doug
On 11/29/07, Chen, Loretta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
We just changed our tables from
If I may, a quick question about InDesign. Can InDesign import xml
and have the information act like it does in Frame.
Background:
We use Frame as part of our software we have designed. This software
does marketing and is also able to export and then import into Frame
to create large
If it turns out the rules aren't just visual affects, but actually are
in the PDF, remember that it is possible for the rule thicknesses to
vary from machine to machine if custom ruling is used...
Also, Rick Quatro's Table Cleaner plug in is a great tool for tracking
down and resolving problems
What we do here is take let's say 100 products which include the
image, descriptions, and all the corresponding sizes or colors in a
table, and export from a filemaker database and then import into
Frame. Frame streams all the information into the template -- all 100
products -- where we then
Thanks everyone for the information.
I don't see why a bad machine would produce a bad on-screen line that
is then visible on a good machine. But I'll make some final checks on
the uniformity of our printer driver and call it a day.
While frustrating, it does takes the heat off me for not
Hi Everyone,
I have a client who has just been acquired. They want me to rebrand their
technical documentation (currently in Word) to comply with their new brand. I
suggested FrameMaker, but they are pushing Quark. I alway thought of Quark as
more appropriate for designers that do brochures,
Loretta,
What you are probably seeing is a result of the screen - sometimes the
line triggers one row of pixels and sometimes two, making it look thicker.
When you increase the magnification all lines trigger two (or more rows)
and look the same.
If you move the image around on the screen do
If it turns out the rules aren't just visual affects, but actually are
in the PDF, remember that it is possible for the rule thicknesses to
vary from machine to machine if custom ruling is used...
Also, Rick Quatro's Table Cleaner plug in is a great tool for tracking
down and resolving problems
Rick,
The only way I've ever done it is to use the generic click notification, then
test the active document to see if it is the Structure View. The test I use
looks for "Structure View" in the title bar, which I know isn't completely
reliable in all instances. Something like this, inside of
> I have a client who has just been acquired. They want me to rebrand their
> technical documentation (currently in Word) to comply with their new brand. I
> suggested FrameMaker, but they are pushing Quark. I alway thought of Quark as
> more appropriate for designers that do brochures, etc.
>
>
> If I may, a quick question about InDesign. Can InDesign import xml
> and have the information act like it does in Frame.
> Background:
> We use Frame as part of our software we have designed. This software
> does marketing and is also able to export and then import into Frame
> to create large
In my experience the true test is whether the rules print
normally...Acrobat has a reputation for not being able to draw lines
well. If the hardcopy is fine, just ignore the inconsistent ruling.
--Doug
On 11/29/07, Chen, Loretta wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We just changed our tables from just header
We've used both Quark and FrameMaker. My colleague, a diehard Quark
user, has agreed that for the documents we are creating (user manuals
for medical devices) FrameMaker is the better way to go. Quark does not
seem to have features for creating books which makes making a global
change in the
Doug wrote:
> In my experience the true test is whether the rules print
> normally...Acrobat has a reputation for not being able to draw lines
> well. If the hardcopy is fine, just ignore the inconsistent ruling.
Just to clarify: Acrobat's problems with line widths is on-screen
only, and it all
As noted, Quark is really a designing application and not really meant for
writing documentation. We tried using it in my organization, but found that it
couldn't handle large manuals very well & it crashed everytime we tried to
generate a TOC & Index,
--
-Original
I love Quark and InDesign, and learned to like PageMaker too back in
the day, but these are desktop publishing applications. They are for
creating layouts.
FrameMaker, on the other hand, is a document management tool. It's
better for authoring, in my view. Microsoft Word is a kind of hybrid
that
On Linda Lecomte at lecomte at comcast.net wrote on 11/30/07 8:36 AM:
> Thanks David. This was helpful and I probably will have more questions. I do
> have two right now:
> What do you mean by Quark does not do numbered lists or footnotes natively.
> Also, is outsourcing this project to you an
> Actually that is not strictly correct. There are a wide range of
> variables that can be used in QXP for number of defined purposes and
> if you are using Quark Tags (somewhat similar in its execution to MIF)
> the range is much wider. However the functionality built into it is
> not as
> What we do here is take let's say 100 products which include the
> image, descriptions, and all the corresponding sizes or colors in a
> table, and export from a filemaker database and then import into
> Frame. Frame streams all the information into the template -- all 100
> products -- where we
Thanks everyone for the information.
I don't see why a "bad" machine would produce a bad on-screen line that
is then visible on a good machine. But I'll make some final checks on
the uniformity of our printer driver and call it a day.
While frustrating, it does takes the heat off me for not
29 matches
Mail list logo
