Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:

Am 2006-05-25 um 13:52 schrieb luigi scarso:

...

OK, it is a big OFF TOPIC. Some notes * the Elements of Typographic Style was made with Indesign (true or false?) and the only words about TeX is an url (true or false ?) * indesign eat xml * there is an indesign server; maybe actually too much complex, but in the future? * I don't know if IDCS2 has some programming capabilities like ConTeXt Ofcourse : *IDCS2 come from Adobe, so it has the feature of latest pdf spec.; *IDCS2 is WYSIWYG * (...possibly many others...)

But there is one important point: Can IDCS2 be view as candidate for automatic typesetting (xml-

...

IDCS2->pdf) ?

At my former employer, a regional daily newspaper, we used IDCS2 in an automated workflow for simple ads, not even via XML, but controlling ID on a WinXP machine via VB/COM, because we needed a *completely* automated solution. I can't tell you much about our application, because my colleague did most of that job (I only delivered the data from another process).

At my actual employer I use ID's XML cpabilities to typeset an event calendar in a city magazine from a database. With a set of well designed style templates the whole thing needs nearly no manual tweaking (only with some ID bugs).

But at the moment I'm planning a simple automated CD cover maker for our backup CDs - using ConTeXt behind a Python GUI...

i always tend to say ... "the problem does not change", so, if figuring out some clever tricks to get something done, then using id or tex makes no difference: one has to figure out the best way what you use depends on taste; we've had (potential) customers who prefered 3b2 (argument: there's a big company behind it, but in the meantime they were sole twice, and the number of people who can program in (i think their special kind of javascript) interface is also limited; apart from pricing ... concerning id ... it's non free, never sure what happens in ten years (adobe dropped pagemaker, (i'm told) messed up frame, so ...) and in order to process older docs will run into compatibility problems some day; supporting pdf trickery is not a real argument, since my experience is that tex is always first in supporting new features; however, adobe is the typesetter company favorite, if only because they use more adobe things (and also because they can keep changing per page which is more proffitable than change for a simple stylesheet once); and ... publishers don't really care about costs anyway so ...) (occassionally we hear stories of failed tryout with 3b2, id, quark, etc while tex base solutions did the job (end kept doing it) for years already; i think that one has to decide for each situation anew) tex will always be a niche product Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------

luigi scarso wrote:

But none say a word about Elements of Typographic Style

i don't have that one -) but 'digital typography' was done in word and looks ok as well (just as docs done with tex can look bad -) Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------

On 5/26/06, Hans Hagen wrote:

luigi scarso wrote:

...

But none say a word about Elements of Typographic Style

i don't have that one -)

but 'digital typography' was done in word and looks ok as well

Ok, I have it: Digital Typography -- Donald E. Knuth --- At page 671 (Index), I see Hagen, Johannes, 628-629 At page 628 I see Hans Hagen: But .... So Johannes => Hans :) wow ! But It seems to me that this book was made with TeX, not word ..... maybe I have the wrong book ? luigi

i was refering to Rubinsteins digital typography, good, another book from your personal collection (how many others ?)

but Knuths book is quite enjoyable too; my guess is that he did it in \TeX -) Yes , but not of-course. I think that Knuth can be the only one who can write about TeX and METAFONT \emphtf{without} use at all \TeX

On 7/1/06, John R. Culleton wrote:

On Thursday 25 May 2006 07:52, luigi scarso wrote:

...

OK, it is a big OFF TOPIC. *IDCS2 is WYSIWYG * (...possibly many others...) Perhaps OpenType support is better in ID than Context, but actually I don't know exactly what is the state of OT in Context.

luigi