TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Subject: Frame and macros From:"Elliott C. Evans" <eeyore+ -at- cmu -dot- edu> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Wed, 28 Jun 2000 12:33:51 -0400
Chris Knight wrote:
> The lack of a macro or scripting language is only one of several very
> important features that Frame for Windows is missing, relative to Word.
At this point, I'd like to note that when FrameMaker was first released
to the Windows platform, Frame Technologies didn't think Frame for Windows
would need a built-in macro capability since Windows 3.1 came with "Macro
Recorder". Since Frame was attempting to conform to the standards of each
platform, they decided to have Windows users use the windows macro standard
rather than Frame rolling their own.
Mysteriously, the Windows Macro Recorder disappeared and macro capability
was built directly into applications instead. (Still think the Microsoft
split is a bad idea?)
I'm not saying it's an excuse, Adobe should have definitely added macros to
Maker by now, but I'm just noting the historical roots of the problem.
--
Elliott C. "Eeyore" Evans eeyore+ -at- cmu -dot- edu
