IDML export

[Old Bruce]

33 minutes ago, m.vlad said:

To be honest, even a slightly broken export feature would be better than none at all.

To be honest, it could be, and most likely would be, much worse. Not better. 

[MikeW]

To be honest (gotta love that phrase), IDML export is the best of alternatives. There are reasons to be able to move publications from one application to another. And like it or not, IDML is the best means currently available in the sense of broadest support.

Collaboration using IDML as the vehicle to do so is not a good idea no matter how good of an implementation. But as a means to migrate existing publications for use in a different application due to need is often enough necessary for my clients.

[tonywaghorn]

Having added my plus 1,  I am now thinking IDML export is not the best idea.

I would however like some text editable export format (apart from PDF.)

[Simon Clay]

Quite new to Affinity and have quickly come to the need for IDML export for sending to external art house.

[PaoloT]

2 hours ago, tonywaghorn said:

I would however like some text editable export format (apart from PDF.)

Are there other interchange file formats for layout projects? (Not PDF, obviously, since it is intended as a final product, and not as interchange format).

Paolo

 

[Old Bruce]

39 minutes ago, PaoloT said:

Are there other interchange file formats for layout projects? (Not PDF, obviously, since it is intended as a final product, and not as interchange format).

Paolo

 

Serif could create an XML version but then Serif will need to have a reader that can interpret the XML.

[m.vlad]

On 9/10/2021 at 3:38 PM, Old Bruce said:

To be honest, it could be, and most likely would be, much worse. Not better.

i'm just saying it can be improved through iteration, the current psd export affinity has is somewhat broken, as text gets rasterized, yet it was still good enough to get into production.

[Old Bruce]

51 minutes ago, m.vlad said:

i'm just saying it can be improved through iteration, the current psd export affinity has is somewhat broken, as text gets rasterized, yet it was still good enough to get into production.

I still believe that there is a huge difference between slightly broken and a limited set of features.

[Komatös]

All those who miss the missing Adobe format compatibilities here should know that Adobe does not publish the structure of the file formats. Third-party manufacturers who want to offer full support would have to pay horrendous sums for licensing.

One wishful thinking would be that all manufacturers of DTP programmes would agree on an exchange format. But that will not happen in our lifetime.

[PaoloT]

16 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

Serif could create an XML version but then Serif will need to have a reader that can interpret the XML.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but isn't Publisher their reader? Also, what would be the aim of an interchange file format that can't be read by third-party software, but needs a dedicated reader?

Paolo

 

[PaoloT]

2 hours ago, Komatös said:

All those who miss the missing Adobe format compatibilities here should know that Adobe does not publish the structure of the file formats.

It looks quite well documented, here.

https://wwwimages.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/devnet/indesign/sdk/cs6/idml/idml-specification.pdf

Paolo

 

[Wosven]

35 minutes ago, PaoloT said:

 

https://wwwimages.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/devnet/indesign/sdk/cs6/idml/idml-specification.pdf

It's a bit old

https://www.indesignjs.de/extendscriptAPI/indesign16/#about.html

[gbzh01]

+1 for IDML export. As of today, I need to 'rent' Adobe programs from time to time for a certain period when I need to work with other companies. I would really really appreciate if I could stop that.

[Aphelon]

On 9/14/2021 at 11:32 AM, PaoloT said:

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but isn't Publisher their reader?

A "Reader" could be a peace of software, that is completely free to use, but obviously would have very limited functionality in editing. A free light Version of Affinity Publisher would make it easier to exchange work in progress with a customer for example (that doesn't want to buy their own copy). Even thou Affinity Publisher is not that expensive, a "Reader" could have a really easy to understand and simple UI and just enough editing features to work with the customer on the same projekt together (for example could the customer edit text within the .afpub).

There would be absolutly no reason to have an extra xml-format that is not compatible with other software, when a light version of Affinity Publisher or "Reader" could just open the .afpub. And if it is really just for "reading", there is no reason to not just send a PDF of the work in progress to your customer. So a Reader with limited editing funcionality is the only thing that makes some sence...

I personally woul not see that as a Feature on my wanted-List, but I also wouldn't see it as completely useless... anyways - it would not be a real replacement for idml-export, since the reason why people would want that is compatibility with inDesign. And I dont think Adobe would implement an import option for an Affinity xml output.

[notna]

+1 please. InDesign is still the industry standard and our editable data is currently locked in AfPub (Nov 2021). I've taken the trial and am delighted that it can replace InDesign, however, I realised I can't share a .idml file with my colleagues to continue the work. Sadly this makes it limiting…

Importing the IDML file had some errors, however, I could correct them in minutes; the same should be possible in reverse?

Edited November 13, 2021 by notna

[Old Bruce]

7 hours ago, notna said:

Importing the IDML file had some errors, however, I could correct them in minutes; the same should be possible in reverse?

Would be nice, but I might suggest that you ask your colleagues to purchase Affinity Publisher. Now rather than having everyone constanly having to deal with the "few minutes" to correct things, you could all just work with Publisher files and no one would need IDML.

[notna]

On 11/13/2021 at 7:07 PM, Old Bruce said:

Would be nice, but I might suggest that you ask your colleagues to purchase Affinity Publisher. Now rather than having everyone constanly having to deal with the "few minutes" to correct things, you could all just work with Publisher files and no one would need IDML.

Hi @Old Bruce, that would nice, however, I am frequently working between multiple consultants all of whom use InDesign and sadly it is challenging to convince many organisations to make the change all at once… I'll keep pushing for it though  

[Mark Oehlschlager]

@notna, unfortunately the cold hard truth of the world is this: Adobe tools are entrenched as the industry standard despite grumblings over their subscription policy. Unless one works alone, one must continue to use the Adobe products. It would take a massive shift in cultural and technological trends to unseat Adobe from their current position. The best that Serif can do is to match Adobe tools, feature for feature, offer more attractive pricing, survive with a niche market of solo users, and wait for some cultural or technological shift that would give them an opening to challenge Adobe for leadership.

[PaoloT]

1 hour ago, Mark Oehlschlager said:

Unless one works alone, one must continue to use the Adobe products.

Exactly like Microsoft Office. Who would have been so fool to think that 60% of that market would have been taken, as of today, by Google apps? Industry standards can't be defeated!

Paolo

 

[PaoloT]

4 hours ago, LondonSquirrel said:

I'm not sure what happened with Corel. They had/have some good products but they don't seem to feature very much these days.

They had incredibly good software, but they managed to destroy everything. WordPerfect, Quattro, CorelDraw, Ventura, and a lot of other software for making multimedia, mind mapping, CAD, OS virtualization. Real winners, with no vision. An insider trading trial against the CEO makes one suspect some competitor didn't want they to succeed.

Paolo

 

[tudor]

I just had to redo a Publisher brochure in Adobe InDesign. The client sent the brochure to be translated in several languages and found out that "the translators are not allowed to use or download Affinity Publisher at this moment because of their company's policy." So they accept only Adobe files.   

An IDML export function would have been great.

 

 

[PaoloT]

35 minutes ago, tudor said:

35 minutes ago, tudor said:

"the translators are not allowed to use or download Affinity Publisher at this moment because of their company's policy."

Obviously. The tools used by translators use IDML as the exchange file format.

Paolo

[ronnyb]

16 hours ago, tudor said:

I just had to redo a Publisher brochure in Adobe InDesign. The client sent the brochure to be translated in several languages and found out that "the translators are not allowed to use or download Affinity Publisher at this moment because of their company's policy." So they accept only Adobe files.   

An IDML export function would have been great.

 

 

Is there a "best practices" reference somewhere on how to best set up a document in Affinity Publisher for a multi-page user manual using a live-updating Table of Contents and containing multiple language translations (for both text and graphics) all in the same document?

Currently I receive an MSW file for each translation. I would like to automate the process of importing those MSW files into Affinity Publisher and splitting it into different Layers and/or Master Pages. I believe that Master Pages and Layers issues are handled differently between Affinity and InDesign....

[Old Bruce]

14 hours ago, ronnyb said:

Is there a "best practices" reference somewhere on how to best set up a document in Affinity Publisher for a multi-page user manual using a live-updating Table of Contents and containing multiple language translations (for both text and graphics) all in the same document?

Currently I receive an MSW file for each translation. I would like to automate the process of importing those MSW files into Affinity Publisher and splitting it into different Layers and/or Master Pages. I believe that Master Pages and Layers issues are handled differently between Affinity and InDesign....

I will assume that MSW is Microsoft's Word word processor application.

I don't see how this has anything to do with InDesign Markup Language. IDML files.

Yes IDML files are quite different compared to Publisher's documents. I would start from scratch rather than fight the import problems which will come up. 

Make a Text Master Page. Have the set of text frames for each language in its own Language Name Layer. These can be turned on and off. Have a set of image frames for each language as well, these will also be in their own Language Name Layers

Name all the layers on the master pages with useful names. English Page Number Left, English Page Number Right, etc If it is a layer on a Master Page give it a name.

[Mark Oehlschlager]

@Old Bruce I understand the utility of setting up and naming text frame layers for each language on the master pages, but what is the utility of setting up multiple image frames for each language?