InDesign or Framemaker

[nina_junco@adobeforums.com]

Documentation group that is transitioning from Quark. We have decided to go to InDesign as a replacement for Quark. Also, looking to implement a content management system. Need to know if we need to look at investing into Framemaker to handle content management and text manipulation needs, e.g. table and page references, indexes, table of contents or is this handled sufficiently by InDesign.

Does anyone have detailed comparison of the two products and whether you need both

[Stu_Bloom@adobeforums.com]

Tables -> reasonably good implementation

Page references -> No

Indexes -> Yes

Tables of contents-< yes

[Dominic_Hurley@adobeforums.com]

Also, autonumbering: ID No, FM Yes
Footnotes, endnotes: ID No, FM Yes
Running heads: ID No, FM Yes
Cross references: ID No, FM Yes
Conditional text: ID No, FM Yes
Inline graphics: ID No, FM Yes
Straddle heads: ID No, FM Yes
High-quality typographic control: ID Yes, FM No
Integration with other Adobe products: ID Yes, FM No

[Dave_Saunders@adobeforums.com]

While it's only a small contribution, I have come up with a way of doing straddle heads suitable for use in newsletters (that is, they only work at the top of a multi-column text frame.

If you're interested, I'm looking for some beta testers. Check out: Head Straddler JavaScript <http://www.pdsassoc.com/index.php?Nav=solnssub&Ban=HeadStraddler&Info=PDSp roducts/HeadStraddler/index.php>.

Dave

[Stu_Bloom@adobeforums.com]

Before I made a major investment in FrameMaker at this juncture, I would take into account the decreasing Adbobe investment in the product. FrameMaker faces an uncertain future at this point.

Don't get me wrong - it's a wonderful product (though, like any product, it has its limitations). You may well be able to justify its purchase. Just don't go into it thinking it will be the solution forevermore.