ANN: Leximation and Silicon Publishing announce DITA plugin for FrameMaker
Leximation and Silicon Publishing today announced the release of DITA-FMx, a plugin for Adobe FrameMaker that provides extended support for the Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA). DITA-FMx is a plugin and set of structure applications that let you create and edit DITA XML files in FrameMaker. The version currently available supports DITA 1.0 and is only available for FrameMaker 7.2. A version that supports DITA 1.1 for FrameMaker 7.2 and 8.0 is under development. DITA-FMx supports fundamental DITA behavior such as ditamaps, relationship tables, and conrefs, through an intuitive user interface with context-sensitive help. This release of DITA-FMx is provided at no cost, and can be downloaded from http://www.leximation.com/dita-fmx IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to be a legally binding signature. If you have received this information in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete this information from your mailbox. Thank you. ___ 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.
ANN: Leximation and Silicon Publishing announce DITA plugin for FrameMaker
Leximation and Silicon Publishing today announced the release of DITA-FMx, a plugin for Adobe FrameMaker that provides extended support for the Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA). DITA-FMx is a plugin and set of structure applications that let you create and edit DITA XML files in FrameMaker. The version currently available supports DITA 1.0 and is only available for FrameMaker 7.2. A version that supports DITA 1.1 for FrameMaker 7.2 and 8.0 is under development. DITA-FMx supports fundamental DITA behavior such as ditamaps, relationship tables, and conrefs, through an intuitive user interface with context-sensitive help. This release of DITA-FMx is provided at no cost, and can be downloaded from http://www.leximation.com/dita-fmx IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to be a legally binding signature. If you have received this information in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete this information from your mailbox. Thank you.
XML in FrameMaker 8 & InDesign CS3
I have worked with both extensively... FrameMaker offers true XML authoring capability. Don't be deceived by a structure view: InDesign is taking steps towards being an XML formatting engine, but really isn't there in terms of authoring. The "map styles to tags" feature, for example, is extremely crude compared to an EDD. The "XML Rules" feature with CS3 definitely extends the XML formatting possibilities considerably (letting you conditionally format or automate based on XPath context), but this requires coding and it still makes InDesign more of a formatting engine for XML than an XML authoring environment. Plenty of headaches with whitespace and other issues if you really try to author in it. There are several use cases where the InDesign XML support makes sense, for example passing in variable data on the "mail merge" level of complexity, but complex structures like DocBook or DITA remain the domain of FrameMaker. Max Dunn Silicon Publishing www.siliconpublishing.com -Original Message- From: framers-bounces+maxdunn=siliconpublishing@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+maxdunn=siliconpublishing.com at lists.frameusers.c om] On Behalf Of John Sgammato Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 8:18 AM To: Frame Users Cc: stclwrsig-l at mailman.stc.org Subject: XML in FrameMaker 8 & InDesign CS3 I am exploring the process of getting my docs structured with the new FrameMaker 8. The process does seem to be improved and the documentation is much, much improved. But last night I was reading the InDesign CS3 info on XML (buried deep in the back of the InDesign manual) and found it to be an excellent intro for the beginner. And the structure view for InDesign looks quite familiar... I am considering playing around with InDesign's structure interface first, to familiarize myself with all the principles and parts, and then advance to FrameMaker. I need to use both eventually because I want to reuse some of the information in my FM manuals in installation posters created in InDesign. Does anyone have experience working with FM8 and InDesign CS3 together? Do you know of landmines and concealed pit traps? John Sgammato Principal Technical Writer Imprivata, Inc. [v] (781) 674-2441 www.imprivata.com "OneSign is single sign-on for the rest of us, with an innovative technology that makes adding almost any application a snap, doing away with manually scripted login procedures, and saving time and money." - Information Security, "Products of the Year", 2006 ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as maxdunn at siliconpublishing.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/maxdunn%40siliconpub lishing.com Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to be a legally binding signature. If you have received this information in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete this information from your mailbox. Thank you.
RE: FrameMaker Server User Interface??
this floored me since the last time it was a single CD that a one-person IT department installed in a few hours. Has the Server version changed? No, it hasn't changed. There are still things you can do with it pretty much as is, although the server form is just a license, (the software on the cd is identical between server and desktop!); expense will depend on which you choose from the many server side ways you can use Frame. It is possible to spend as much as you like on front end systems, or you can use it via free tools like DZBatcher, plugins you write yourself, whatever. And the Adobe site says that Server needs a companion and must be integrated into a solution before it is ready for use. You can either purchase third-party solutions (From Datazone or Finite Matters Limited) or you can build your own solution using Frame Developers Kit. We have used it extensively with Miramo, and via home-built plugins, and with DZ Batcher. There are many ways to use it as a server and I could never figure out from the license the fine line between server usage of FrameMaker, though in our case it is usually a back end system for Web PDF generation, which was pretty obvious. Miramo was worth it in some cases for scalability/ease of administration, though other solutions cost very little, yet had more time/effort or were simply less demanding. Hopefully with the next FrameMaker they will do something to differentiate server from desktop, and offer some sort of jump start. $25,000 would not be unreasonable for a robust plugin that would let you leverage FrameMaker as a server more directly, but that should be the sort of investment Adobe makes in the product, not each shop has to ante up, and there are also plenty of alternatives. If you do end up with Frame Server then in purchasing it, there sure is a better deal with an upgrade from desktop than an outright purchase... Max Dunn Silicon Publishing IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to be a legally binding signature. If you have received this information in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete this information from your mailbox. Thank you. ___ 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.
FrameMaker Server "User Interface"??
> this floored me since the last time it > was a single CD that a one-person IT > department installed in a few hours. > Has the Server version changed? No, it hasn't changed. There are still things you can do with it pretty much as is, although the "server" form is just a license, (the software on the cd is identical between "server" and "desktop"!); expense will depend on which you choose from the many "server side" ways you can use Frame. It is possible to spend as much as you like on front end systems, or you can use it via free tools like DZBatcher, plugins you write yourself, whatever. > And the Adobe site says that Server needs > a companion and "must be integrated into > a solution before it is ready for use. > You can either purchase third-party > solutions (From Datazone or Finite Matters > Limited) or you can build your own solution > using Frame Developers Kit." We have used it extensively with Miramo, and via home-built plugins, and with DZ Batcher. There are many ways to use it as a "server" and I could never figure out from the license the fine line between "server usage" of FrameMaker, though in our case it is usually a back end system for Web PDF generation, which was pretty obvious. Miramo was worth it in some cases for scalability/ease of administration, though other solutions cost very little, yet had more time/effort or were simply less demanding. Hopefully with the next FrameMaker they will do something to differentiate server from desktop, and offer some sort of jump start. $25,000 would not be unreasonable for a robust plugin that would let you leverage FrameMaker as a server more directly, but that should be the sort of investment Adobe makes in the product, not each shop has to ante up, and there are also plenty of alternatives. If you do end up with Frame Server then in purchasing it, there sure is a better deal with an upgrade from "desktop" than an outright purchase... Max Dunn Silicon Publishing IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to be a legally binding signature. If you have received this information in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete this information from your mailbox. Thank you.
RE: Frame's future
Hi Shlomo, Please update to a current version of the FrameMaker Application Pack for DITA. FrameMaker 7.2 DITA support is Based on a core plugin developed and maintained by Leximation (quoted from the DITA About window). Is this a problem? Adobe picked a great starting point for the app pack, in my opinion. In fact, my FrameMaker console tells me that the beta period for this component has expired, and that I should contact Leximation for an update (even though it was downloaded from Adobe). Then you are using an old version. The second beta should not have this issue. Thanks, Max -- Max Dunn Silicon Publishing IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to be a legally binding signature. If you have received this information in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete this information from your mailbox. Thank you. ___ 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.
Frame's future
Hi Shlomo, Please update to a current version of the FrameMaker Application Pack for DITA. > FrameMaker 7.2 DITA support is "Based on a core plugin developed and > maintained by Leximation" (quoted from the DITA > About window). Is this a problem? Adobe picked a great starting point for the app pack, in my opinion. > In fact, my FrameMaker console tells me that the beta period for this > component has expired, and that I should contact Leximation for an > update (even though it was downloaded from Adobe). Then you are using an old version. The second beta should not have this issue. Thanks, Max -- Max Dunn Silicon Publishing IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to be a legally binding signature. If you have received this information in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete this information from your mailbox. Thank you.
RE: Reasons to Structure
Structure gives you the benefit of separating content from presentation. Sounds trivial, and you may think you've accomplished this without structure, but that is the primary reason to structure content: so your XML abstraction is as agnostic as possible to the form of rendition that you will publish in. Typically, most unstructured forms of content management blur the distinction between the XML abstraction and the XML (or other) rendition. Structuring content using XML standards also enables interoperability with the ever-evolving publishing tools at our disposal. We don't really know what cool publishing application will come up next, but we can bet it will import and export XML, thus it will be interoperable with systems based on structured content. Not that structured content is always the right path... The sorts of question to ask are: * How many output formats do you have? (if it is just one, perhaps unstructured is best!) * Is translation required? (XML content management can definitely reduce cost of translation) * How much content reuse is required/implemented? (the more reuse, the more benefit structure provides) I would encourage you to explore the Adobe FrameMaker 7.2 Application Pack for DITA, in particular its Open Toolkit integration. I think when you generate different forms of help using the OT, combined with PDF using the Framemaker rendition engine, you will understand the benefits of structured content. http://www.adobe.com/go/dita/ Thanks, Max -- Max Dunn Silicon Publishing -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] om] On Behalf Of Rene Stephenson Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 6:46 AM To: MATT TODD; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Reasons to Structure Matt, I'll start the ball rolling, but I'm sure you'll get tons of responses from folks more savvy about structure than myself. ;-) * Dynamic formatting: you can use structured FM to create formats that behave differently depending on various surrounding factors, like indent to a certain level if it follows X paragraph but to a different level if it follows Y paragraph. * Ability to produce cleaner XML for flexible web output. Rene MATT TODD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All right...tell me good, solid reasons why a company would want to structure their documents. With my limited knowledge, I know structure effectively controls styles, fonts, etc...but I could manage that myself without structure. By extension, I know style control also controls content location because particular types of writing usually use a particular style...but I can also manage that myself. I know structure is designed to encourage single-sourcing, but I'm already headed in that direction without structure. I'm convinced with time and continuing documentation analysis, I can parse our documentation so duplicate verbiage in all our documents imports from one source. I can do that without structure. I can use conditional text to further cut down duplicate verbiage; it requires no structure. I can buy scripts or third-party software to automate documentation procedures without resorting to structure. So tell me...why structure documentation? I don't know enough to answer that question, and neither do my bosses. What's so great about it? What capabilities does it offer that demand its use? Right now, I'm just doing what I'm told, but it's always nice to found actions on solid reason. Matt I'm working with legacy documentation created in Word and FM 7.0 unstructured. The goal is FM 7.0 structured. Whose goal is this, and why? I've seen the gee whiz demonstrations from Adobe reps and been utterly convinced that I Need Structured Docs Now! only to return to my pdf-output-only client projects that have no real need for structured Frame. Before committing, make sure there's a business case for structuring. ___ 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/rinnie1%40yahoo.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. Rene L. Stephenson eNovative Solutions, Inc. Business Phone: 678-513-0051 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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/maxdunn%40siliconpub lishing.com Send administrative questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity
Reasons to Structure
Structure gives you the benefit of separating content from presentation. Sounds trivial, and you may think you've accomplished this without structure, but that is the primary reason to structure content: so your XML abstraction is as agnostic as possible to the form of rendition that you will publish in. Typically, most unstructured forms of content management blur the distinction between the XML abstraction and the XML (or other) rendition. Structuring content using XML standards also enables interoperability with the ever-evolving publishing tools at our disposal. We don't really know what cool publishing application will come up next, but we can bet it will import and export XML, thus it will be interoperable with systems based on structured content. Not that structured content is always the right path... The sorts of question to ask are: * How many output formats do you have? (if it is just one, perhaps unstructured is best!) * Is translation required? (XML content management can definitely reduce cost of translation) * How much content reuse is required/implemented? (the more reuse, the more benefit structure provides) I would encourage you to explore the Adobe FrameMaker 7.2 Application Pack for DITA, in particular its Open Toolkit integration. I think when you generate different forms of help using the OT, combined with PDF using the Framemaker rendition engine, you will understand the benefits of structured content. http://www.adobe.com/go/dita/ Thanks, Max -- Max Dunn Silicon Publishing -Original Message- From: framers-bounces+maxdunn=siliconpublishing@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces+maxdunn=siliconpublishing.com at lists.frameusers.c om] On Behalf Of Rene Stephenson Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 6:46 AM To: MATT TODD; framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Reasons to Structure Matt, I'll start the ball rolling, but I'm sure you'll get tons of responses from folks more savvy about structure than myself. ;-) * Dynamic formatting: you can use structured FM to create formats that behave differently depending on various surrounding factors, like indent to a certain level if it follows X paragraph but to a different level if it follows Y paragraph. * Ability to produce cleaner XML for flexible web output. Rene MATT TODD wrote: All right...tell me good, solid reasons why a company would want to structure their documents. With my limited knowledge, I know structure effectively controls styles, fonts, etc...but I could manage that myself without structure. By extension, I know style control also controls content location because particular types of writing usually use a particular style...but I can also manage that myself. I know structure is designed to encourage single-sourcing, but I'm already headed in that direction without structure. I'm convinced with time and continuing documentation analysis, I can parse our documentation so duplicate verbiage in all our documents imports from one source. I can do that without structure. I can use conditional text to further cut down duplicate verbiage; it requires no structure. I can buy scripts or third-party software to automate documentation procedures without resorting to structure. So tell me...why structure documentation? I don't know enough to answer that question, and neither do my bosses. What's so great about it? What capabilities does it offer that demand its use? Right now, I'm just doing what I'm told, but it's always nice to found actions on solid reason. Matt > I'm working with legacy documentation created in Word and FM 7.0 > unstructured. The goal is FM 7.0 structured. Whose goal is this, and why? I've seen the gee whiz demonstrations from Adobe reps and been utterly convinced that I Need Structured Docs Now! only to return to my pdf-output-only client projects that have no real need for structured Frame. Before committing, make sure there's a business case for structuring. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as rinnie1 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/rinnie1%40yahoo.com Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. Rene L. Stephenson eNovative Solutions, Inc. Business Phone: 678-513-0051 Email: rinnie1 at yahoo.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as maxdunn at siliconpublishing.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/maxdunn%40siliconpub lishing.com Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameuse
RE: Frame Server experiences?
Any feedback on the plan or implementation would be valuable. Frame Server is literally FrameMaker, the same exact program, running in a server environment, at this point. DZBatcher, http://www.datazone.com/dzbatcher2.html is one way you can run Frame in a batch or server mode. Hopefully future versions of Frame Server will provide more of a true server implementation. There are many ways to flow data into Frame templates: Miramo works well, in my experience, but is additional cost to the Frame server license. Thanks, Max IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to be a legally binding signature. If you have received this information in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete this information from your mailbox. Thank you. ___ 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.
Frame Server experiences?
> Any feedback on the plan or implementation would be valuable. Frame Server is literally FrameMaker, the same exact program, running in a server environment, at this point. DZBatcher, http://www.datazone.com/dzbatcher2.html is one way you can run Frame in a batch or server mode. Hopefully future versions of Frame Server will provide more of a true server implementation. There are many ways to flow data into Frame templates: Miramo works well, in my experience, but is additional cost to the Frame server license. Thanks, Max IMPORTANT NOTICE: This communication, including any attachment, contains information that may be confidential or privileged, and is intended solely for the entity or individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message is strictly prohibited. Nothing in this email, including any attachment, is intended to be a legally binding signature. If you have received this information in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone or return e-mail and delete this information from your mailbox. Thank you.
RE: 2003?
Hi, guys...is FM 7.2 supported on Windows 2003 AS? Officially supported or not, we've run Frame Server on Windows Server 2003 with no problems. Thanks, Max ___ 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.
2003?
> Hi, guys...is FM 7.2 supported on Windows 2003 AS? Officially supported or not, we've run Frame Server on Windows Server 2003 with no problems. Thanks, Max
