[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[New search]
To: Lee Richardson <lhr@xxxxxxxxx>, framers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, framers@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Request for info re PostScript flows in FM
From: Michael Richards <michaelr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:41:19 +1000
References: <v04220806b59e4fe8852d@[153.32.158.253]>
Sender: owner-framers@xxxxxxxxx
Do NOT remove the functionality!!!!!!! Reason: we operate in an environment where each Frame book is stored in a repository. If I wish to put links from one Frame document into another in another book, I would have to check out both books and make sure that this is always done in subsequent editing sessions carried out by other hands -- not possible! And, added to that the fact that many of our books have links to considerably more than one book -- some to as much as sixty others!!!! This is very easy to maintain when the pdf links are passive through embedded ps. It would be a nightmare if we used x-refs! AND if that weren't enough: we also have a number of projects. The relationship between the various directories on our various webservers is complex. The relationships can be easily handled passively through embedded ps. It would not be possible through setting up x-links!!!!! If Adobe in a moment of __EXTREME_FOOLISHNESS__ were to take away this VALUABLE facility (one that is a killer wrt MS Word!!!!!) it would have to (barest minimum): 1. allow setting up a named destination in a dialogue (to replace the DEST pdfmark) 2. being able to specify passively a link to a named pdf file and a dest within it, as we can now do with GoToR. Plus there's lots more. Like everything that you can now do with Schlomo's Acrobat timesavers, for starters. In short, taking away this IMPORTANT ps facility from Framemaker would be sheer vandalism and would be quite unnecessary!!!!!! Who are these idiots? Why are they intent on ruining a great product like the Frame-acrobat duo???? What drugs are they taking??????? Give us their names and we will have them killed!!!! Could I express my anger any stronger?????? Yours in the belief that sanity will prevail, Michael Richards. Lee Richardson wrote: > > FrameMaker has long included the ability to embed PostScript code directly into a FrameMaker document. We tried dropping support for embedded ps back in FM4, but received much feedback that it was important and useful. > > Acrobat has included support for embedded ps in products through Acrobat 4.0 (PDF version 1.3). They're proposing removing this functionality in PDF 1.4, for a variety of reasons. > > If this occurs, and there are no obvious workarounds, what functionality would need to be added to FrameMaker to make up for embedded ps? IE, if your documents contain ps flows, what do you use it for? > > As examples, embedded ps was formerly used for PDF Doc Info; now unneeded with the addition of the PDF Doc Info dialog in FM6. There are additional reports of using embedded ps for printer tray control linked to particular master pages. What else? > > You can reply directly to me. Thanks. > > ...Lee > > : Lee Richardson : mailto:lhr@adobe.com : +1 408.536.6412 : > : Dev Mgr, FrameMaker : Adobe Systems, Inc : +1 408.537.5113 fax : > > ** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com ** > ** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body. ** -- Michael Richards Email: michaelr@ind.tansu.com.au Tel: +61 2 9206 3524 Locked Bag 6581 Sydney 1100 Fax: +61 2 9281 1301 New Wave-D, Telstra Corporation, Australia ** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com ** ** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body. **