Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Dwayne Harris
MemberJongware–Normally I do get the proper dialogue box as you have shown. But some folks can take that exact same file and when they try to import it, ID does not recognize the file as Tagged Text, and instead get the plain text import options. Then they have to hit cancel, open the file in Word, and re-save as a plain text file again. Then ID will recognize it.
My confusion is why ID will recognize the file as Tagged Text on some machines, but not others. Or why out of the four I created, one was not recognized. They were all done the same way.
Thanks.
MemberThanks Jongware for the links and stuff. But i don't see that option. I have selected “show options” in CS4 and CS5 and I don't see the “all files” or the others.
Tomorrow I will show the different dialogue boxes.
Thanks
doc
MemberNOTE: I just tried four different files that I exported as ID tagged text files and tried to import. 1 out of the 4 wants to import as a text only document (i.e., untagged). If I opened it in Text Edit or Word and typed something and deleted it, and then saved, it then imported fine. Why do some files import properly, but some need that extra step?
MemberUPDATE: The over-rides for RTF files are definitely CS5, so far as I can tell. I have tried various files and jobs in CS3 and CS4 and I don't get the issue. And I was able to get rid of half the over-rides in CS5.
So I can explain better, our workflow is as follows:
1) import XTags files into ID (new document, default settings).
2) export as RTF
3) designer imports into his/her file with style sheets made and H&Js personalized
Now, normally, the designer gets the files and flows into his/her document and stylesheets come through and everything is nice and dandy. But in CS5, when the designer imports the file, there are those hypenation and justification over-rides as well as others which you can see if they export as a ID tagged file from their document.
From what I've been able to figure out and test: ID CS5 is exporting the default settings into the RTF file, and it's over-riding the designer's file. I don't have that problem with CS3 or CS4.
And, if I can match all the document settings EXACTLY in my default settings, I don't have an issue. Now, we all know that it's impossible to make my default settings match a dozen designers' settings.
For some reason CS5 insists on embedding the default settings into an RTF file.
I'm in the process of convincing the publisher in question to accept ID-tagged text files, but they are hestitant. I can say from past experience that many designers do not know how to import tagged text files. They are used to just opening the RTF file and copying and pasting [ :( ] Or they can't comprehend that there is no different between “placing” a RTF file or a tagged file.
I've been testing for the past few days (a few hours a night) and it seems to be a CS5 issue.
Member@orielwen:
But the issue is that .5 point is not that asking too much so far as accuracy. ID has always used .5 increments, but in CS5 it doesn't. To type it in takes three or four times longer than just dragging a guideline.
MemberI don' t know about the benefits as I don't do newsletters. But to make a PDF, you export your InDesign file. You can choose PDF, EPS, or JPG. Be sure you have that black arrow on when you do it, and not the text tool.
And welcome to InDesign Secrets
MemberThanks Dave. I figured it was a CS5 thing. Damn it, it seems like CS5 changed so much stuff and made some things worse.
We're gonna have to go with tagged ID text files, I guess. That was always my preference, but years back designers had brain farts when importing tagged files. They were used to copying and pasting word files, and didn't know how to import. We got them used to RTF files, and now we need to go tagged text files.
I figured the Minion thing was CS5 only, as I had no problems with other versions.
Appreciate the help.
doc
MemberDave–that just rounds it off to full point increments (no half points).
I don't think it's a percentage issue. This never happened until CS5. CS5 is now measuring by .6 instead of .5.
For example, I just tried CS2 through CS4 and measured 3p11.5, 4p, 4p.5. In CS5 I get 3p11.4, 4p0, and 4p0.6.
If I go to 1200 percent, I can eventually get measurements by .5s, but it's very slow.
ID CS2-4 would do .5 at 100 percent and 200 percent with no problem. CS5 insists on .6
Membermartys–in book publishing that is considered adjusting the space below the head. Space is only adjusted above. By using that baseline shift the space below the head is being changed.
When I have heads fall at the top of the page, I have my style sheet compensate for it by using a white rule above (or color none). I might make it a 2 point rule above off set by 12 points (being sure to check “keep in text frame”).
That way when a head falls at the top of a page, the unseen rule above will push everything down so that the first text line following the head is on even-lines (i.e., lines up on the baseline grid).
Are you trying to have your head sit on the baseline grid? Normally, at least in book publishing, the head itself doesn't need to sit on the baseline grid. It's the text following that needs to. I've had jobs where the head (and text following) had to be pushed down 1/2 line.
Or am I misunderstanding?
doc
Membermartys–in book publishing that is considered adjusting the space below the head. Space is only adjusted above. By using that baseline shift the space below the head is being changed.
When I have heads fall at the top of the page, I have my style sheet compensate for it by using a white rule above (or color none). I might make it a 2 point rule above off set by 12 points (being sure to check “keep in text frame”).
That way when a head falls at the top of a page, the unseen rule above will push everything down so that the first text line following the head is on even-lines (i.e., lines up on the baseline grid).
Are you trying to have your head sit on the baseline grid? Normally, at least in book publishing, the head itself doesn't need to sit on the baseline grid. It's the text following that needs to. I've had jobs where the head (and text following) had to be pushed down 1/2 line.
Or am I misunderstanding?
doc
MemberI don't think that each and every page was set with a section number. When you select a page and select “section start” the box is automatically checked (it must be a default)
Do all your pages have a little triangle above them? That little triangle indicates you have manually started it as a certain page number.
Why your blanks are not facing, I don't know. Was the original Quark document set for facing pages? Have you tried to select/deselect page shuffling in the page pallette?
doc
MemberI don't think that each and every page was set with a section number. When you select a page and select “section start” the box is automatically checked (it must be a default)
Do all your pages have a little triangle above them? That little triangle indicates you have manually started it as a certain page number.
Why your blanks are not facing, I don't know. Was the original Quark document set for facing pages? Have you tried to select/deselect page shuffling in the page pallette?
doc
MemberI'm in book publishing.
Mine vary depending upon the font, but it's around 80 minimum, 90 optimal, and 120 max.
I find that going under 80 minimum will cause very tight lines.
EDIT: I don't allow any sort of letterspacing
MemberI'm in book publishing.
Mine vary depending upon the font, but it's around 80 minimum, 90 optimal, and 120 max.
I find that going under 80 minimum will cause very tight lines.
EDIT: I don't allow any sort of letterspacing
MemberI've had templates where it was named with the .indt extension, but apparently the designer had saved it as an InDesign document (.indd) and just changed the extension to .indt.
So I had to resave as a true template with the .indt.
-
AuthorPosts