If you need Arbortext, I can help, but if you can get pure DITA source files from you customer you won’t need me at all. Based on my experience, I’d say it’s partially resolved, a merged version of the original source files into a larger single-file conglomeration. Could you elaborate on what we are looking at here? In an ideal world, the longest time between upgrades would allow you to leave a version before it becomes unsupported, with enough cushion to handle the expected project calendar hiccups. I also don’t know enough about DocBook to know if your file looks like DocBook. We also did an Adobe Webinar showing the first rev of the solution. For these to appear mid-file means that you have a file that is the result of a bunch of other files merged together.
|Date Added:||9 July 2004|
|File Size:||49.2 Mb|
|Operating Systems:||Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Not upgrading, however, exposes you to increased compatibility issues as the rest of your environment moves forward think Java, content management systems, browsers, etc. Looking at the markup, you have something that isn’t pure DITA. The short answer is, “No.
Every major upgrade 5.
Arbortext editor on save adding PI at cursor locat – PTC Community
Based on my experience, I’d say it’s partially resolved, a merged version of the original source files into a larger single-file conglomeration. I also don’t know enough about DocBook to know if your file looks like DocBook.
This content has been marked as final.
If you’ve got something custom, then making it work in Frame is going to take work. The shortest upgrade cycle would be designed not to upset anyone in your environment while delivering arbortext editor 5.3 features or increased stability, or some other Win that have a demonstrable ROI.
But if you’ve taken arbortet time to address it, apparently it might be worth understanding better. I just want the same look and feel of Arbortext some changes here and there i can manage though. If you are using arborgext features, they may change a lot between minor versions.
That said, in either arbortext editor 5.3 or the wide middle in betweenupgrading costs time and incurs risk. You can not post a blank message. Arbortext Stylesheets typically come in three flavors: We built a FrameMaker addon that does exactly what you are looking to .53.
Arbortext – the first XML/SGML Editor
Please type your message and try again. If you need Arbortext, I can help, but if you can get pure DITA source files from you customer you won’t need me at all. Please enter a title. All that said, Russ is absolutely right. If it was DITA, it should just work. The cost to keep a legacy system running well beyond all arbortext editor 5.3 is, sometimes, not at all beyond reason.
Go to original post. It can take weeks to months to get it working, especially if you don’t know anything about it. Could you elaborate arborrtext what we are looking at here? Correct Answers – 10 points. It kind of sounds like you took on a project without really digging into the requirements or the tools you’d arbortext editor 5.3 to do the work.
In an ideal world, the longest time between upgrades would allow you to leave a version before it becomes unsupported, with enough cushion to handle the expected project calendar hiccups. I do not know what tool created the file in the screenshot you provided nor arbortext editor 5.3 I know what process was used to create it.
I have little experience with Arbortext, but from your screenshot, your file .53 not look like DITA.