I may have succeeded with some of it in Apub, but I am not confident and I certainly could not have done the footnotes and made them move with text or pagination changes. ![]() Just about to publish another book with something like 360 pages including hundreds of images and a good number of footnotes. Either that, or they have lost the people who understood PP9 and the pther Serif products. I suspect that there may be a face-saving problem as a result. The issue really is that Serif jumped the gun by dropping PagePlus too soon. There used to (and still is not, in my view) an affordable program to touch PagePlus9. My own tendency is to use the program which works, which is sometimes an Affinity version (APhot is good, for example, for lighting but often it is not the best for my work - Photoshop Elements or Corel Paintshop Pro is). I have been trying to create stuff in APub, but on the whole it does not seem to be as functional as PP9 unless you are seriously into the other Affinity stuff. While there are some decent things in APub it is still a long way from the complex techniques of PagePlus9 - and even earlier PagePlus versions. I also am not a professional designer, although I publish stuff professionally. I think your points are very weak and flawed reasoning for not producing it.Sadly, there is no sign of a footnotes (or endnotes) system arriving unless it is in the new version due to come - but it does not seem to be featured in the Beta version mentioned above. I think it would be fantastic if Clarivate did produce an Endnote plugin for Indesign-time well spent. I also have produced many image based documents and pure text documents in Word for well over a decade. I have produced many documents and books with Indesign. I am an advanced user of both Word and Indesign. My suggestion would facilitate writing in Indesign by using the proposed Indesign CWYW. The whole point for requesting the plugin is to enable writers like myself to totally disband with writing in Word. Why in the world would you want to export a Word document to Indesign if there was an Indesign CWYW plugin plugin. I think your point is a flimsy one-the evidence for Indesign that it doubles up as a word processor are demonstrated in the functions of Indesign, and secondly, the outputed published books with pure text. I have written many articles with pure text in Indesign. Furthermore, many professional writers have purchased the plugin from ID-Extras called ‘footnote’ which is designed for pure text inclusion: “Fully-automated Complex Layouts with Multi-column Footnotes in InDesign made easy!” ( Footwork - )įurthermore, I think you will find that those that use the ID-Extra plugin, the books that have been published are pure text only books. The majority of writers, not all, that use footnotes/endnotes are writers, not designers. The only thing lacking in Indesign is the ability to produce multiple Indices, which Word can do. This is why Indesign has a book feature and Word doesn’t why Indesign has more advanced typography controls than what Word has. In fact, the Indesign program features, like for like, match the functions that Word has, but Indesign has more. Even Word falls short of the functionality of footnotes within Indesign. Pure creation tools like CorelDraw don’t have footnotes and endnotes functions that combo programs like Indesign does. Your point negates the basic truths of the functions that Indesign has. It can be used either as a creation tool or word processor. You posit straw man arguments that has some modicum of truth to them, making it compelling, but on analysis, your points are not exactly correct. NOTE, I have produced documents with InDesign, which resides on my computer, for well over a decade.Ĭreation tool and Word Processor Tool Point I think there are more useful things Clarivate could spend their time on Especially as it request the miss-use of InDesign. ![]() Therefore, despite my initial thought that it is a Good Idea, on reflection I don’t think it is. ![]() Neither would you be editing the images in InDesign, you would use Photoshop (or similar). You would not be putting the images into Word unless you were going Word → PDF. You would be writing the text in Word, editing, spill and grimmer checking, adding citations etc and then importing/flowing it in to the InDesign/Publisher document. One is a document creation tool, the other is a word processor. You would not write text in either of them as you would in Word. However, both InDesign and A-Publisher are document creation tools into which you paste the text and images. On the face of it, it sounds like a Good Idea™ and I was about to suggest the same for Affinity Publisher (as it is widely and increasingly used in professional circles since Adobe went to a subscription model)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |