Jump to content

mcglk

Members
  • Content count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Since InDesign came out (and for QuarkXPress before that, back to 1994), I used Perl to generate short AppleScript snippets that would then do the application control. That way, I had the best of both worlds: regexes and lots of libraries around, yet still could control the dang application. I'm really missing my barcode-generator scripts lately.
  2. As long as one can feed scripts into a shell-level program à la `osascript`, I don't really care what language Serif chooses for the purpose. Sure, it'd be nice to have an API one could call, but then, that would put a hard limitation on what languages you could use. As far as I'm concerned, I don't need to write entire programs in whatever language Serif uses; I just need to be able to create objects and have control over all the attributes I'd normally use the UI for. fde101: While I've gotten used to the indentation thing, it still bugs me a bit. I'm not sure Python reminds me of punchcards, though; indentation would have seemed wasteful, and made it much more difficult to shuffle the order of statements if you needed to. . . .
  3. Being able to automate InDesign was one of the main reasons I gravitated to it for so long; I was able to write scripts that would generate barcodes on the fly, populate label sheets from a database with full control over placement, all sorts of things. That said, Adobe's AppleScript support has always been half-hearted, and now Apple seems to be putting AppleScript in the let-it-die department. It's extremely disappointing. So while full AppleScript support would be nice, it might be considerably wiser if there were an independent scripting engine for Affinity Publisher (and Designer and Photo, to be honest). But it'd have to be able to take input from the Unix world (I routinely generate AppleScripts from Python or Perl and use `osascript` to run them, for example; I'd need a similar process for Affinity applications).
  4. I have to say, I'm fairly impressed so far, and honestly, in a number of ways, I could easily see preferring Affinity Publisher over InDesign. But it's the little things that kind of make me nuts. Like, if I select a word from another document (like an InDesign document) and paste it into Affinity Publisher, even though I haven't selected the end-of-line/linefeed/whatever-you-want-to-call-it, AP wants to add a linefeed after it anyway. Doesn't matter if I use Paste or Paste Without Format, I have to hit backspace because my text is screwed up. (Side note: It would be really nice if this could read InDesign documents without too many screwups within the first few releases. I'd like to free myself from Adobe by the end of 2019 if at all possible.) Also, does anyone know the best place to ask for feature suggestions?
  5. As an experiment, I used Arno, which has a variety of styles. I drew out a text frame, selected the font I wanted (Arno Regular), and was delighted to find that ⌘I and ⌘B toggled italics and bold, respectively. That said, when I toggled them off, it dropped me not into Arno Regular, but Arno Caption. This is odd, because the fonts appear to be sorted by weight and the first one in the list is Arno Light Display, and the first one alphabetically is Arno Bold, so I have no idea why it's opting for Arno Caption. In spite of the bugs and absences I see, this looks to be a solid start, and I'm very much looking forward to the next version (hoping like heck that it can import InDesign files).
×