Re: PageMaker vs. Framemaker (those who've used both)

Subject: Re: PageMaker vs. Framemaker (those who've used both)
From: "T.W. Smith" <techwordsmith -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 17:06:39 -0400

PageMaker is discontinued.

FM 7.1 has a PageMaker import filter ... it's hit or miss but better
than not having one.

IMHO, FM is better than PM for long technical documents, featuring
repeating style elements, graphics, numbered lists, TOCs, LOFs, LOTs,
and Indexes. PM is better for multi-flow documents and documents where
the page layout is more varied.

On Tue, 5 Oct 2004 14:07:45 -0600, cpldll -at- earthlink -dot- net
<cpldll -at- earthlink -dot- net> wrote:
> I believe that Frame 7.1 touts a PageMaker conversion utility. I have no
> experience with it. Perhaps, someone who has used it could comment on its
> effectiveness.


Remember, this is online. Take everything with a mine of salt and a grin.


ROBOHELP X5: Featuring Word 2003 support, Content Management, Multi-Author
support, PDF and XML support and much more!

WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed!

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Previous by Author: Re: ADMIN: New TECHWR-L Poll Question
Next by Author: Re: ADMIN: Amnesty
Previous by Thread: Re: PageMaker vs. Framemaker (those who've used both)
Next by Thread: MOU -- has someone written one ?

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads