John Pilla is unavailable.
I will be out of the office starting 05/18/2007 and will not return until 06/04/2007. I will be traveling to Madrid, Spain to present at the EMEA Enablement Conference, then to Austin, Tx after Memorial day weekend. I will respond as I am able amidst travel and presentations. I will respond when I return. ___ 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: XML - graphics - import
Hi Richard... Maybe you could describe what the problem is. I'm assuming that the file isn't opening properly .. but what kind of errors are you getting? Do you have a structapp defined for this XML doctype? ...scott Scott Prentice Leximation, Inc. www.leximation.com +1.415.485.1892 Allen, Richard (Raytheon) wrote: Hi I have been trying to open up a XML document in FrameMaker 7.2 which contains graphic entities. I am at a los as to what I am missing. The graphics are declared at the top of the XML document instance. The structure of the XML document instance is valid. Anyone have a hint as to what I might look at to resolve this? Thanks Richard This message contains information that may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive mail for the addressee), you should not use, copy or disclose to anyone this message or any information contained in this message. If you have received this message in error, please so advise the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. ___ 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: Do I need to jump into the Structured FM pool?
Lin Surasky wrote: So I'm thinking that structured FM must be able to help, in that I could somehow create element tags for Fixes and Issues, and then just change the element tag for the Issues that have been fixed and somehow regenerate the documents (how, I don't know -- do I need to maintain this in a spreadsheet or database?) so that the content is moved to the correct section along with its cross-referenced bullet (each section has a bulleted list to make navigation easier). Oh yeah, and can they be re-sorted by section into numerical order? Structure can certainly help - if you store your manuals in XML all the manual work can be eliminated. Chances are your bug tracking system can export reports in XML. An XSLT stylesheet can very easily replace the existing version of this information so when next you open the document in FrameMaker, the data is all updated. Of course, this open up myriad possibilities for customisation of the bug information - separation of code and interface bugs, ordering by severity for developers and date for managers, whatever you can imagine. The point is that generating this information is best accomplished by your bug tracking software, not by FrameMaker. It can generate a report of open bugs, so why would you want to do exactly that in FrameMaker? You may want to dump it all into FrameMaker and conditionally display it - providing different views for different audiences is very much part of what FrameMaker should be responsible for. Probably the biggest gain that you can get out of XML is the ability to make your information span applications, but to do so you obviously need to look wider than FrameMaker. You're doing software manuals by the sound of it, so you presumably have access to programmers. If I was you, the first step would be sit down with a couple of them and see if you have the resources to develop a scalable, robust system. I recommend against the toe in the water approach - I've seen too many people spending too much time trying to gradually improve them into the system that they knew they wanted but weren't brave enough to embark on in the first place. Measure twice, cut once and have fun! Marcus ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Ann Zdunczyk wrote: It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books are going away and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, plan to continue reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a screen, I do that all day. It is much easier to read a book at the beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not listen to books on tape, I READ. I love the SMELL of a book. I love the feel of a book. Despite the fact that environmentally it would be very desirable to eliminate paper, I think the real push has been for the smart organization of information rather than the elimination of a clumsy way of delivering it. By all accounts, the amount of information being stored is still increasing dramatically and it's getting far easier for us to put our hands on it, so it's not that surprising that we continue to use at least as much paper as in the past. As far as a device that you can comfortably and safely use in the tub is concerned, I don't think that paper will be the delivery method of the future. Macintosh will no doubt come out with a range of topic-oriented scents (historic tome, murder mystery, etc.) for their TubPaper (TM) that will achieve your comfort factor as well as providing searchability, bookmarks that don't fall out, background music and can be adjusted for reading in candlelight. I asked my daughter what she was doing at school a couple of weeks ago. We're creating a database of endangered species was the answer. I thought that was kind of interesting... because she's 8 years old and in grade 3. Paper books are going the way of the comforting crackling of the wireless. Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, but like you, I hope they manage to. Marcus ___ 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.
Confused about hexadecimal codes
I'm fiddling about with a program that creates MIF files and changing one of its behaviours - instead of inserting character tags for special characters, such as Char Tab, I want to use the hexadecimal code. According to the Frame Character_Sets manual, the hex code for a tab (for example) is \x08. However logic - and every other hex code reference that I've checked - tells me it's 09, not 08 (logical because the ASCII code for a tab is 9). 08 is the code for a backspace. Even odder is that the 08 code does seem to work as a tab with FrameMaker. Why is this different? And how can I tell which other codes are different from the standard set, other than checking each one individually? I'm puzzled about this! Anybody got any answers? Thanks Pat -- CatBase: The Data Publishing Solution CatBase Software Ltd. T: +44 (0) 1462 454522 W: http://www.catbase.com skype: pat.bensky -- ___ 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:Love Framemaker
I will give you a better on. I had a client call me and want me to edit and format a manual he had written. When I got there, there were 1250 pages of gunge, in PageMaker format, many, many graphics. He wanted me to turn it into something that could indexed, using Word. I told hime I would take the job, however, the final document would be in Framemaker, and that it would be a real book, Table Of Contents, Index, and Glossary that were linked to the body. He didn't know what I was telling him. He said that if it weren't a Word document, then that stuff couldn't be done. That is when I told him I didn't want the job. He hired someone else, they worked on it for two months, threw up their hands (I wonder if that is all they threw up?), and came to me asking me to put it into Framemaker. I did, took all of two weeks, cost him less than the two months he had paid the other Tech Writer (Aside - she was an secretary working in a local lawyers office). It was a bit of a struggle at first, but when I got the hang of it, using Macro Express to run a bunch of macro's in PageMaker and Framemaker, it came together very nicely. It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books are going away and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, plan to continue reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a screen, I do that all day. It is much easier to read a book at the beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not listen to books on tape, I READ. I love the SMELL of a book. I love the feel of a book. I like FrameMaker. I know FrameMaker. I plan to use it until it no longer works on ANY of the machines I have. I still use FrameMaker on my MAC. I have been using FrameMaker since 3.0 back in the early 90's (when it was Frame Technologies). I use it as it is. Even though I use most of the other publishing software also, I prefer FrameMaker. I have to use the other software because my customers do. When I get a FrameMaker project it feels like I am putting on my favorite and most comfortable outfit, usually sweats and warm slippers (I work at home so I can!!). I give my two cents to Adobe reps when I see them. I try to give them ideas like most of you to continue the development of FrameMaker. I HOPE that Adobe continues updating FrameMaker. I push FrameMaker to my customers. In the work that I do I am surprised at the software that some customers use to create the manuals. I am surprised how little the document designers know about the software that they use. OK my two cents for a Friday. Have a GREAT weekend everyone. Z ** Ann Zdunczyk President a2z Publishing, Inc. Language Layout Translation Consulting Phone: (336)922-1271 Fax: (336)922-4980 Cell: (336)456-4493 http://www.a2z-pub.com ** -- Keith L. Smyth President Smyth Consulting - Close only counts in horeshoes, handgrenades, and tactical nukes. - Technical Documentation Consultant ___ 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: Confused about hexadecimal codes
On Sat, 19 May 2007 15:43:58 +0100, Pat Bensky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm fiddling about with a program that creates MIF files and changing one of its behaviours - instead of inserting character tags for special characters, such as Char Tab, I want to use the hexadecimal code. According to the Frame Character_Sets manual, the hex code for a tab (for example) is \x08. However logic - and every other hex code reference that I've checked - tells me it's 09, not 08 (logical because the ASCII code for a tab is 9). 08 is the code for a backspace. Even odder is that the 08 code does seem to work as a tab with FrameMaker. Why is this different? And how can I tell which other codes are different from the standard set, other than checking each one individually? I'm puzzled about this! Anybody got any answers? FrameMaker uses its own character set internally, similar to (but not identical to) the Mac character set. It's documented in the FrameMaker Quick Reference booklet, and in: \yourframedir\OnlineManuals\Character_Sets.pdf which appears to be the doc you are looking at. A *lot* of codes are different from the standard ANSI set. We use mapping tables in Mif2Go. Note that for dingbats fonts, the mapping is *different* from that for normal fonts. ;-) -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.omsys.com/ ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, but like you, I hope they manage to. But why? FM is only a tool for the creation of content. CS3 is also a content creation tool, but does things with various content data types. When I remarked about Narayen's strategy of banking the farm on Web 2.0 I was also pointing to something that I think is a big mistake on his part. He is banking on being able to be the market leader in content creation, which is where there is the greatest competition. For every one of Adobe's products there are alternatives, some of which are free (both in the sense of no charge as well as in terms of licensing). Web 2.0 is nothing more than a phase. It is a developmental plateau on the way to somewhere else and for Narayen to steer the course of Adobe's future towards it means that he is already behind the competition who are moving on to other means of producing output from semi/unstructured data sources. Once upon a time Adobe used to create the targets -- Postscript, PDF, type technologies, etc. --- now they appear to have become me too's. FM is even more relevant now than ever before with its ability to manage semi-structured data and producing multiple forms of output from a single source. Yet it is able to do this from within relatively simple (if somewhat aged) interface. But, having said that, I hope Adobe are never tempted to mess with FrameMaker's interface. It is something I am well used to and I don't have to waste inordinate amounts of time figuring out where did they put that damned widget this time. Alan ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send list messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: FW: Adobe CEO interview
Alan wrote: Adobe will have a formidable job of keeping FrameMaker relevant, but like you, I hope they manage to. But why? FM is only a tool for the creation of content. CS3 is also a content creation tool, but does things with various content data types. I don't really see FrameMaker as being a tool for the creation of content, at least not in the sense that it has been in the past. I see it more as being a tool for the publishing of content. I know that my thinking is colored by the type of work that I trend to be involved with, but I just don't see people setting up for big sets of manuals built on unstructured FrameMaker the way they used to. Frankly, I'd be very surprised if that approach was growing in popularity. I don't know anything about CS3, but any software that contains the word suite makes me nervous - my first thought would be might I need to use it from end-to-end even if I have existing systems functioning well for some components? I may be completely wrong - please go easy on me if I am. When I remarked about Narayen's strategy of banking the farm on Web 2.0 I was also pointing to something that I think is a big mistake on his part. He is banking on being able to be the market leader in content creation, which is where there is the greatest competition. I agree with you there - nobody is ever going to own these markets again. I like to think that the interoperability provided by XML has contributed to the demise of software lock-in. Concepts like Software As A Service also eliminate the uneconomical model of many of the licenses purchased not being in use at any given point, as was discussed on Framers over the past week. Web 2.0 is nothing more than a phase. It is a developmental plateau on the way to somewhere else and for Narayen to steer the course of Adobe's future towards it means that he is already behind the competition who are moving on to other means of producing output from semi/unstructured data sources. Once upon a time Adobe used to create the targets -- Postscript, PDF, type technologies, etc. --- now they appear to have become me too's. That might be a bit harsh - the way things move these days, I think a lot of people feel that metoodom would be a pretty respectable goal. :-) Adobe have to hang their hats on something and while I completely agree that Web 2.0 is ill-defined, I think they could do worse. FM is even more relevant now than ever before with its ability to manage semi-structured data and producing multiple forms of output from a single source. There we disagree. I think that FrameMaker's traditional niche will continue to shrink until the software ceases to be viable. Adobe has picked winners plenty of times in the past, so I have a reasonable amount of faith that they can do it again and keep FrameMaker relevant, but not by maintaining the status quo. Yet it is able to do this from within relatively simple (if somewhat aged) interface. But, having said that, I hope Adobe are never tempted to mess with FrameMaker's interface. It is something I am well used to and I don't have to waste inordinate amounts of time figuring out where did they put that damned widget this time. I think this reflects our different use - I don't really have any loyalty to the interface because I don't spend that much time using it. I'd learn the interface if new features made it worth it. Marcus ___ 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.
Adobe CEO interview
On 18/05/2007, at 7:24 PM, Graeme R Forbes wrote: > From the interview (http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm? > articleid=1741) with the Adobe CEO: > > * > > We will continue to extend the capabilities of the core product in > each of those segments with some of the features that are available > in the other products. But, yes, it is our goal to continue to make > sure that we don't leave any customer behind. For a number of > customers who have adopted a product like FrameMaker, we will > continue to invest in it. > > * > > A number that's a log way short of 100%. But the middle sentence > does show a sense of humor. > One issue that concerns me is that Adobe seems to be betting the farm on Web 2.0 while reducing the importance of print based and other forms of output media. Perhaps that has something to do with Narayen's failed attempt at Pictra. He feels he needs to succeed in that area, to prove his machismo or what ever. "don't leave any customer behind" reminds me of the US "don't leave any child behind" education system. Umm, but what does that actually mean, anyway? Alan
Do I need to jump into the Structured FM pool?
Could you present your release notes in tables? That lets you use FM's sort function to split the bugs into resolved and not. You just have to have a column called something like "status" and then sort according to that. Then immediately before release, you can split the table up to make your 3 sections and delete the status column. And I guess you could convert to text if you can't use table layout in the final docs. Cheers, Rebecca >>> "Lin Surasky" 05/19/07 5:43 AM >>> Or can I keep my inflatable ducky hiked firmly around my middle and paddle around in unstructured FM? Over the past year or so, I've been poking around at structured FM with no real goal in mind except to see if it might benefit us down the road. For the most part, our process is pretty linear, and structured FM isn't yet necessary for our regular user guides and manuals. So I have a general idea of what we'd need, but I don't have the full picture yet... I'm working on a new product with a new team, and each customer gets their own version of the product with their own customized release notes. When you all have stopped screaming, I'll continue... The release notes are very simple. There are three main chapters: Requested Customer Enhancements, Bug Fixes, and Known Issues (bugs that we're aware of that have not yet been fixed). Please don't start screaming again; I really need your advice! The gist of the situation is that on release day, I have to go into our bug reporting system, and check all the Known Issues to make sure they're still issues. If they've been fixed, they move to the Bug Fixes section. So I'm thinking that structured FM must be able to help, in that I could somehow create element tags for Fixes and Issues, and then just change the element tag for the Issues that have been fixed and somehow regenerate the documents (how, I don't know -- do I need to maintain this in a spreadsheet or database?) so that the content is moved to the correct section along with its cross-referenced bullet (each section has a bulleted list to make navigation easier). Oh yeah, and can they be re-sorted by section into numerical order? This sounds like it should be so simple, but I'm lost on the mechanics -- any recommendations for how to set this up? Or if there's a better way to manage this even in unstructured FM, that'd be great too. The cutting and pasting is REALLY not my idea of fun! Thanks! Lin ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as rebecca.officer at alliedtelesis.co.nz. 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/rebecca.officer%40alliedtelesis.co.nz Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. NOTICE: This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify Allied Telesis Labs Ltd immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender has the authority to issue and specifically states them to be the views of Allied Telesis Labs.
John Pilla is unavailable.
I will be out of the office starting 05/18/2007 and will not return until 06/04/2007. I will be traveling to Madrid, Spain to present at the EMEA Enablement Conference, then to Austin, Tx after Memorial day weekend. I will respond as I am able amidst travel and presentations. I will respond when I return.
XML - graphics - import
Hi Richard... Maybe you could describe what the problem is. I'm assuming that the file isn't opening properly .. but what kind of errors are you getting? Do you have a structapp defined for this XML doctype? ...scott Scott Prentice Leximation, Inc. www.leximation.com +1.415.485.1892 Allen, Richard (Raytheon) wrote: > Hi > > I have been trying to open up a XML document in FrameMaker 7.2 which > contains graphic entities. I am at a los as to what I am missing. The > graphics are declared at the top of the XML document instance. The > structure of the XML document instance is valid. > > Anyone have a hint as to what I might look at to resolve this? > > Thanks > > Richard > > This message contains information that may be confidential and > privileged. Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive mail > for the addressee), you should not use, copy or disclose to anyone this > message or any information contained in this message. If you have > received this message in error, please so advise the sender by reply > e-mail and delete this message. Thank you for your cooperation. > > >
Confused about hexadecimal codes
I'm fiddling about with a program that creates MIF files and changing one of its behaviours - instead of inserting character tags for special characters, such as , I want to use the hexadecimal code. According to the Frame Character_Sets manual, the hex code for a tab (for example) is \x08. However logic - and every other hex code reference that I've checked - tells me it's 09, not 08 (logical because the ASCII code for a tab is 9). 08 is the code for a backspace. Even odder is that the 08 code does seem to work as a tab with FrameMaker. Why is this different? And how can I tell which other codes are different from the standard set, other than checking each one individually? I'm puzzled about this! Anybody got any answers? Thanks Pat -- CatBase: The Data Publishing Solution CatBase Software Ltd. T: +44 (0) 1462 454522 W: http://www.catbase.com skype: pat.bensky --
Love Framemaker
I will give you a better on. I had a client call me and want me to "edit and format" a manual he had written. When I got there, there were 1250 pages of gunge, in PageMaker format, many, many graphics. He wanted me to turn it into something that could indexed, using Word. I told hime I would take the job, however, the final document would be in Framemaker, and that it would be a real book, Table Of Contents, Index, and Glossary that were linked to the body. He didn't know what I was telling him. He said that if it weren't a Word document, then that stuff couldn't be done. That is when I told him I didn't want the job. He hired someone else, they worked on it for two months, threw up their hands (I wonder if that is all they threw up?), and came to me asking me to put it into Framemaker. I did, took all of two weeks, cost him less than the two months he had paid the other "Tech Writer" (Aside - she was an secretary working in a local lawyers office). It was a bit of a struggle at first, but when I got the hang of it, using Macro Express to run a bunch of macro's in PageMaker and Framemaker, it came together very nicely. >It is interesting that I have been hearing about paperless offices for years >but have yet to see one. Its like the people that say books are going away >and being replaced by electronic media. I, as a reader, plan to continue >reading PAPER books. I do not plan to read on a screen, I do that all day. >It is much easier to read a book at the beach, in the tub, in bed etc rather >that a laptop, PDF, etc. I do not listen to books on tape, I READ. I love >the SMELL of a book. I love the feel of a book. > >I like FrameMaker. I know FrameMaker. I plan to use it until it no longer >works on ANY of the machines I have. I still use FrameMaker on my MAC. I >have been using FrameMaker since 3.0 back in the early 90's (when it was >Frame Technologies). I use it as it is. Even though I use most of the other >publishing software also, I prefer FrameMaker. I have to use the other >software because my customers do. When I get a FrameMaker project it feels >like I am putting on my favorite and most comfortable outfit, usually sweats >and warm slippers (I work at home so I can!!). > >I give my two cents to Adobe reps when I see them. I try to give them ideas >like most of you to continue the development of FrameMaker. I HOPE that >Adobe continues updating FrameMaker. I push FrameMaker to my customers. > >In the work that I do I am surprised at the software that some customers use >to create the manuals. I am surprised how little the document designers know >about the software that they use. > >OK my two cents for a Friday. > >Have a GREAT weekend everyone. > >Z > ** Ann Zdunczyk President a2z Publishing, Inc. Language Layout & Translation Consulting Phone: (336)922-1271 Fax: (336)922-4980 Cell: (336)456-4493 http://www.a2z-pub.com ** -- Keith L. Smyth President Smyth Consulting - Close only counts in horeshoes, handgrenades, and tactical nukes. - Technical Documentation Consultant
Confused about hexadecimal codes
On Sat, 19 May 2007 15:43:58 +0100, Pat Bensky wrote: >I'm fiddling about with a program that creates MIF files and changing one of >its behaviours - instead of inserting character tags for special characters, >such as , I want to use the hexadecimal code. According to the >Frame Character_Sets manual, the hex code for a tab (for example) is \x08. >However logic - and every other hex code reference that I've checked - tells >me it's 09, not 08 (logical because the ASCII code for a tab is 9). 08 is >the code for a backspace. Even odder is that the 08 code does seem to work >as a tab with FrameMaker. > >Why is this different? And how can I tell which other codes are different >from the standard set, other than checking each one individually? > >I'm puzzled about this! Anybody got any answers? FrameMaker uses its own character set internally, similar to (but not identical to) the Mac character set. It's documented in the FrameMaker Quick Reference booklet, and in: \yourframedir\OnlineManuals\Character_Sets.pdf which appears to be the doc you are looking at. A *lot* of codes are different from the standard ANSI set. We use mapping tables in Mif2Go. Note that for "dingbats" fonts, the mapping is *different* from that for "normal" fonts. ;-) -- Jeremy H. Griffith, at Omni Systems Inc. http://www.omsys.com/
