Re: Mainstream publishing could use footnotes [was 'RE: But what about the FOOTNOTES???']

[Cas Tuyn <Cas.Tuyn@xxxxxxxx>]

David,

I fully agree. Five years ago we could have converted all our development 
staff to FM Lite, given a competitive price against an already bought Word, 
ie something in the range of EUR 100 per head. FM could have become the 
lingua franca for development and customer documentation. There still is the 
occasional developer who uses emacs/Latex or FM for development docs, because 
the database only requires PDF to store, but e few enlightened people are 
looking at our XML process to see if that can be the mutually shared document 
format. Wit hXML, it is no longer the application, but the data format that 
is king.

Now it's too late, we have bought 24 Epic licenses for our procedural 
documentation, because of the really native XML (save-as XML takes ages in 
FM7, because it is a conversion everytime) and interface to Oracle iFS.

We'll upgrade a number of authors to FM7 for the descriptive documentation, 
so we can compare the two.

Cas Tuyn
ASML


> To me, their biggest mistake of all is not producing a "Frame Lite"
> product, comparable to Photoshop Elements compared to the full product.
> This would allow customers to have a cheap method of producing Frame files
> for non-publishers on their staff and eliminate the constant conversion
> hassles we all know and "love"--engineering documents, for instance, could
> be authored in such product without having to employ Word or some other
> tool and then add to our workload in making publishable documents. In my
> view, so long as such a tool is not available, Adobe will continue to
> encounter excessive resistance to moving to Frame in shops who simply do
> not think the expense of full Frame licenses for their engineering and
> development staff is worthwhile.
>
> David


** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **