Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'quarkxpress'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Affinity Support
    • News and Information
    • Affinity Support & Questions
    • Feature Requests, Suggestions & Discussions
  • Learn and Share
    • Tutorials (Serif and Customer Created Tutorials)
    • Share your work
    • Resources
  • Bug Reporting
    • Report a Bug in Affinity Designer
    • Report a Bug in Affinity Photo
    • Report a Bug in Affinity Publisher
    • (Pre 1.7) Affinity Range Bugs Forums
  • Beta Software Forums
    • Affinity Designer Beta Forums
    • Affinity Photo Beta Forums
    • Affinity Publisher Beta Forums

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 3 results

  1. New here — not much luck yet with forum search. If there's a discussion about this, apologies for not having found it. Back in the Neolithic I used QuarkXPress, which supported a tagging method for text import: Simple codes embedded in plain text were transformed into complex formatting during import. The competition didn't have such a feature at the time. It was among several reasons for QXP's becoming the program of record for book pagination (until InDesign came along). Even years before microcomputers took over the world, the typesetting systems I used had tagging and translation-table features. Same purpose: Prepare text containing simple codes, then get complex formatting during text import. The machines' CPUs ran at glacial speeds compared with what we have now. But the text-import systems were fast and efficient. It's orders of magnitude faster than importing plain text into a design/pagination program and then hand-formatting it. Search/replace is not efficient unless a program supports complex search/replace enabling it to find starting and ending tags and formatting text located between those tags. Even at that, having to do it repetitively is tedious and time-consuming. (If search/replace can be controlled via scripting, that certainly helps.) Manipulating text outside the pagination program is inherently more efficient. It can be done with powerful and fast tools ideal for that purpose (Python, Perl, Ruby, and so forth). Affinity Publisher looks like an excellent contender. It too needs this kind of feature. If the company has no such plans for the near future, I hope the program has a plug-in architecture enabling a third party to add this functionality. To anyone importing a lot of text, that kind of automation is worth paying for.
  2. What is the target market for Affinity Publisher? Is it intended for professional typesetters or only enthusiastic hobbyists? If the former at what stage do you intend to offer multiline composition? This was the key feature that won me over from QuarkXPress 4.1 to InDesign from the day version 1.0 was released in the UK. And I suspect its continuing omission from XPress is central to Quark's failure to win back disgruntled users of InDesign, despite the current upgrade offer (upgrade to XPress 2015 via Xpress 10 for £299 from XPress 3 or later).
  3. 1. Would I be able to open files created in InDesign or QuarkXpress in Publisher like I can do with Illustrator files in Designer and Photoshop files in Photo? I use InDesign a lot want to know if I need to start converting files before Publisher is released and before I let go of my Adobe Subscription. 2. Would we be able to create interactive PDFs as we can do in InDesign? Hyperlinks, Cross-Referencing, Table of Contents, etc.? 3. Any news on release date for Publisher?
×