TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Frame vs. Interleaf From:Bev Parks <bparks -at- HUACHUCA-EMH1 -dot- ARMY -dot- MIL> Date:Sun, 18 Jun 1995 10:10:14 MST
>>4) Interleaf's founders come from a typesetting background, and this is
>>reflected in the way that Interleaf handles documents. It's hard to explain,
>>and I haven't used Interleaf in some years, but here goes: you'd have to
>>apply styles to the text after it was composed, like newspapers are typeset.
To which Robert Plamondon replied-->
> This is not the case with Interleaf, and never has been (I used
> version 1.0). All text objects belong to one style or another; there
> is no "style limbo." You can change a paragraph from one style to another
> at any time.
=======================
I second Robert on this. I started using Interleaf with version
5.4, so I can't vouch for the earlier versions. Prior to
learning Interleaf, I used Ventura Publisher and similar DTPs.
Interleaf's component bar was a slightly different animal to get
used to, but it didn't take me long to realize its advantages. I
think Interleaf is great.
In an earlier post, Robert classed Interleaf as high-end, Frame
as mid-range, and Word as low-end DTP packages. I don't
entirely agree with this. It is my understanding (I have no
direct experience with Frame) that Frame is in the same class
as Interleaf. Many people don't even consider the two (Frame
and Ileaf) as DTP packages at all, but something "higher."
But looking at them as high-end DTP, that would put Ventura,
PageMaker, and Quark in the mid-range area. To me low-range
would be MS Publisher (which I like) and PagePlus. MS Word is
still a word processor which happens to have some DTP
capability.
=*= Beverly Parks =*= bparks -at- huachuca-emh1 -dot- army -dot- mil =*=
=*= "These opinions are mine, not my employer's." =*=
=*= =*= =*=
