Jump to content

IDML export


Recommended Posts

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....

2021 16” Macbook Pro w/ M1 Max 10c cpu /24c gpu, 32 GB RAM, 1TB SSD, Monterey 12.3.1

2018 11" iPad Pro w/ A12X cpu/gpu, 256 GB, iPadOS 16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012) Mac OS 10.12.6 || Mac Pro (Late 2013) Mac OS 11.6.8

Affinity Designer 1.10.5 | Affinity Photo 1.10.5 | Affinity Publisher 1.10.5 | Beta versions as they appear.

I have never mastered color management, period, so I cannot help with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Mark Oehlschlager said:

@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?

@ronnyb mentioned User Manual. I am assuming that the images may well contain other language text. Think of a user manual for a digital camera's operating system, you will have images of the interface and any words will be in your chosen language.

MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012) Mac OS 10.12.6 || Mac Pro (Late 2013) Mac OS 11.6.8

Affinity Designer 1.10.5 | Affinity Photo 1.10.5 | Affinity Publisher 1.10.5 | Beta versions as they appear.

I have never mastered color management, period, so I cannot help with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 for IDML export from Publisher!

I would like to introduce the Affinity suite in our architectural office, which uses Adobe traditionally. It super easy to open existing InDesign booklets in Publisher, but it's a one-way-ticket. That is why I could not convince people fully.

Even if the format would not guarantee 100% compatibility, it would be a tremendous help.

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/19/2021 at 3:12 PM, Old Bruce said:

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.

Thanks @Old Bruce much appreciated 

2021 16” Macbook Pro w/ M1 Max 10c cpu /24c gpu, 32 GB RAM, 1TB SSD, Monterey 12.3.1

2018 11" iPad Pro w/ A12X cpu/gpu, 256 GB, iPadOS 16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are welcome ronnyb.

MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012) Mac OS 10.12.6 || Mac Pro (Late 2013) Mac OS 11.6.8

Affinity Designer 1.10.5 | Affinity Photo 1.10.5 | Affinity Publisher 1.10.5 | Beta versions as they appear.

I have never mastered color management, period, so I cannot help with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

+1

I have started using Affinity Publisher at home for personal projects. I'm in a position to roll it out to my studio to use in a professional setting (approx 25 users), except realistically we cannot use Publisher professionally without the ability to export to IDML or some other format readable by Indesign. We need to be able to collaberate easily with others in the design industry who are of course largely using Indesign at the moment.

Any news if this is in the pipeline?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

+1 for IDML export

At this point, I'm OK if it's not perfect conversion. I just need the afpub files to be openable somehow in InDesign. Then the InDesign user can edit my files and doesn't have to redo everything from scratch.

Pretty please, Serif! 😟

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/18/2020 at 5:47 PM, PaoloT said:

Salve, dall'Italia ho acquistato questo software che mi ha rapita, e sono molto curiosa di utilizzare.

Ho notato subito però questo "limite" nel non poter esportare i file in IDML. Sono al primo utilizzo e tutti i file che ho provato ad aprire in IDML sono utilizzabili ed è davvero fantastico.

Ma, come giustamente fa notare Paolo, siccome si tratta di un programma "giovane" e poco conosciuto, chi come noi lavora nel campo editoriale, ha la necessità di esportare in IDML per rendere i lavori compatibili con le applicazioni dei nostri colleghi esterni. Pertanto, userò  Affinity Publisher per imparare l'utilizzo e per piccoli lavori che non prevedono passaggi su altri computer, sperando che venga implementata la possibilità di esportare in IDML i file creati. 

On 2/18/2020 at 5:47 PM, PaoloT said:

Hi,

I think this has not been asked as of yet (at least, I can't find it when searching). Probably, most of us are interested in IDML import, since the most urgent thing is transitioning from ID to APublisher.

However, I think that the ability of exporting IDML is still very important in a professional context.

1) Most of the professional publishing sector will be based on ID for years, and being able to transfer our files to a larger workgroup is very important to have our work accepted.

2) Computer aided translation tools are usually compatible with IDML files (and I can confirm they can be perfectly compatibile with ID). Translating our work will probably mean that the translators will ask us an IDML file.

So, I hope to see this implemented in a near future version.

Paolo

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'll do a +1 for IDML export too.  It's the closest thing to a "universal" page layout format right now.  Even if it's not perfect, if it gets you 75-90% of the way there, that's a lot of work that doesn't have to be redone if you were to recreate something from scratch.

With an IDML file, I can get the document into various versions of InDesign as well as QuarkXpress.  I think Scribus possibly too.  And others.

It's not just for sharing or collaboration either.  For me, the bigger thing is archival purposes.  It's not entirely uncommon that I might have to open a file I created many years ago (for example, a PageMaker file) to update it or repurpose it or etc.  Will Affinity Publisher 2040 be able to open my 1.x file?  Maybe.  But, I'd be more comfortable having a secondary option just in case.

An XML file could work too, maybe.  But what other than Scribus could open it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dcr said:

An XML file could work too, maybe.

As far as I know, IDML is a set of XML files. So, if you will no longer to open the full set, you will at least recover most of the data.

Paolo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously many Editors and Designers have expressed the need for AfPub to export an IDML file. I am about to co-design a book with an English designer. He uses InDesign and I now use AfPub. We both worked together in London so we know what we want.

I have been trying to work out the best way to design and edit pages and or design separately and combine into one file for publishing. IDML is what is required. 

How do the programmers and marketers at Affinity decide what is important? Do they survey on line comments or is there a priority list of requirements? From a distance it seems as if the main efforts are being used to sort out 'bugs' which is understandable. What would be interesting to see is a set of goals that Affinity are aiming to complete. Perhaps not enough to alert competition but enough information for users to know that something is happening about a particular requirement.

[like moving pages in AfPub from a dialogue box rather than trying to drag pp147-148 back to chapter one  after p10...]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, boorowaboy said:

What would be interesting to see is a set of goals that Affinity are aiming to complete.

Will this change anything? Knowing their goals will not make you able to use the perspective features in the current version of the program. And if the schedule will change (as is typical with all products, from a new bench in your block to the launch of a spacecraft), you will still not be able to use the features you were hoping to use.

If you depend on bidirectional IDML exchange, it would be very wrong to start your project hoping it will arrive. Maybe it will, maybe not. Even if someone at Serif told us that they hope to include it. The right thing to do is to use the tools that are available now.

Paolo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PaoloT said:

Will this change anything? Knowing their goals will not make you able to use the perspective features in the current version of the program. And if the schedule will change (as is typical with all products, from a new bench in your block to the launch of a spacecraft), you will still not be able to use the features you were hoping to use.

If you depend on bidirectional IDML exchange, it would be very wrong to start your project hoping it will arrive. Maybe it will, maybe not. Even if someone at Serif told us that they hope to include it. The right thing to do is to use the tools that are available now.

Paolo

 

This is exactly the reason for me to stick with Adobe InDesign (even if I bought a couple of Publisher licenses, to support its development). 
Let me also add that I've been successfully shifted to Photo and Designer for their – albeit imperfect – abilities to work bidirectionally in .psd and .ai formats. Otherwise, it would have been impossible to adopt them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PaoloT said:

Will this change anything? Knowing their goals will not make you able to use the perspective features in the current version of the program. And if the schedule will change (as is typical with all products, from a new bench in your block to the launch of a spacecraft), you will still not be able to use the features you were hoping to use.

If you depend on bidirectional IDML exchange, it would be very wrong to start your project hoping it will arrive. Maybe it will, maybe not. Even if someone at Serif told us that they hope to include it. The right thing to do is to use the tools that are available now.

Paolo

 

Hi Paolo   I don't anticipate any advances in the near future. I have been a graphic designer for over 50 years and seen all types of systems come and go. Usually innovations are sold as if they are world changing but inevitably they are just hype. Adobe is a leader in hyping up what they do but perhaps not as good at it as Apple.

We are beginning the project knowing that we will work with whatever System, Program or App that is available. Always be positive, you just never know something may happen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, emarillo said:

This is exactly the reason for me to stick with Adobe InDesign (even if I bought a couple of Publisher licenses, to support its development). 
Let me also add that I've been successfully shifted to Photo and Designer for their – albeit imperfect – abilities to work bidirectionally in .psd and .ai formats. Otherwise, it would have been impossible to adopt them. 

This is exactly my situation. Photoshop happily replaced, Illustrator for most, but not all the tasks, due to issues in data exchange between Illustrator and Designer. And InDesign still in full use, since Publisher is not yet there for most of my tasks.

I've used Publisher for some shorter projects, and it was very nice. Now, if someone asks me for an IDML file they want to reuse in InDesign, or a version of the works in an RTL language…

Paolo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PaoloT said:

Photoshop happily replaced, Illustrator for most, but not all the tasks, due to issues in data exchange between Illustrator and Designer.

VectorStyler seems to be the missing link between Designer and Illustrator.  (Caveat: I haven't done extensive transfer from Designer to Illustrator; mostly, my use is Illustrator to Designer.)  Designer only gets what is in the PDF stream of an .ai file.  VectorStyler seems to get everything.  Plus VectorStyler has some of the features Designer doesn't have yet.  I sometimes wish Affinity would buy Numeric Path and merge VectorStyler into Designer.

Photoshop is by far the easiest to replace of the Adobe suite, aside from some plugins and scripts that can't transfer over to Affinity Photo.  Illustrator is next in line and then InDesign is third and a distant third at that.

Of course, Affinity Designer and Photo have been around four to five years longer than Publisher, so I guess that makes sense.  I suspect Publisher will catch up sooner than we think though probably not as fast as we'd like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of compatibility issues: I've just opened one of my CS6 documents with InDesign 2021. The program took more than one minute just to launch. Scrolling is extremely slow and stuttering, even with my 12-core Xeon Mac with two graphic cards and tons of memory. And it created an artifact to a fill.

The same document, opened by Publisher from an exported IDML file, was perfectly fine. It scrolls fast and smoothly. There were no artifacts. (And yes, alas, cross-references were gone, and there was no way to include it in a binder to generate a common ToC and synchronize global changes…).

Paolo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, PaoloT said:

Speaking of compatibility issues: I've just opened one of my CS6 documents with InDesign 2021. The program took more than one minute just to launch. Scrolling is extremely slow and stuttering, even with my 12-core Xeon Mac with two graphic cards and tons of memory. And it created an artifact to a fill.

The same document, opened by Publisher from an exported IDML file, was perfectly fine. It scrolls fast and smoothly. There were no artifacts. (And yes, alas, cross-references were gone, and there was no way to include it in a binder to generate a common ToC and synchronize global changes…).

Paolo

 

CS6 to CC2021? It's really a long jump :) mind you, I sometimes find difficult to convert .indd files from CC2020 to CC2021... it's always better to export them in IDML (but maybe you don't have an active installation of InDesign CS6). This is one of the reasons why an imperfect IDML-Publisher conversion feature would be soooo much better that no feature at all.

PS If I may ask: are you from Italy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, emarillo said:

CS6 to CC2021? It's really a long jump

But there are several CS6 installations still active. Not all the companies update the computers so often. If a system works, it works. So, I would have expected a flawless conversion.

But you are probably right: importing an IDML file might force ID to do a more careful conversion. Or it is just that IDML files are cleaner than INDD ones.

Paolo (from Italy)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Please note there is currently a delay in replying to some post. See pinned thread in the Questions forum. These are the Terms of Use you will be asked to agree to if you join the forum. | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.