Footnotes

[Robert_Levine@adobeforums.com]

It's off on mine.

Bob

[Dominic_Hurley@adobeforums.com]

Sorry if I pooped the party.

You didn't - that script was actually discussed (briefly) in the thread "special characters and footnotes" of a few days ago. I haven't tried it yet, but from the readme it seems to be a step more than other scripts that are about and does a bit more comparison between the footnotes and the footnote references. It's still a long way from being proper support, however.

Phil, did your FM users mention ID's modal style dialogues as being a problem? They rate as one of the major annoyances for me when it comes to ID's usability, as opposed to its features.

[Stu_Bloom@adobeforums.com]

If you've never had a Word file go corrupt on you,




I haven't

you've not had extensive experience with truly complex Word files




Oh, but I have

involving specialized templates, extensive multi-level outlining, already
generated TOCs, graphics, master docs, and subdocs, Asian text, exotic
unicode ranges, etc.




Except for Asian text, all of those. Add in frames, multiple columns, hundreds of cross-references, footnotes, fields, thousands of section breaks, tables - and, oh, by the way over a network. Occasional crashes, yes - corrupted documents, never.

The architecture of Word is just too fragile for this.




Not in my experience. If you're having these kinds of problems, the first thing I'd check would be your network reliability.

[Kalavinka@adobeforums.com]

We might agree to disagree here. I no longer have corruption problems with any of my many software programs and my system's rock-solid. Whether or not this is because I now refrain from trying to make Word or WP into book-layout programs will have to be a moot point. (But I didn't make up the fact of having found multiple corroborations for this "factoid" on Word-related sites.)

.... but true enough, this was before upgrading from Office XP to Word 2003.

Mitra

[pjredman@adobeforums.com]

Dominic,

I've taught this class to roughly 150 people and never had anyone mention it. Many participants are either Photoshop or Illustrator users so I think the similarity of the interface to those applications becomes the overriding factor. I find that our illustrators who have been using Adobe Illustrator for many years pick up InDesign faster than our FrameMaker users who have never used Photoshop or Illustrator.

We've got some work arounds for some of InDesign's more glaring omissions, such as table styles and running heads (we use scripts for these). The Frame users seem willing to accept these solutions as long as they work dependably.

Phil