Printable View
Gameprinter, nobody is attacking Xara, or your workflow, and never the amazing results of your work.
That said, if a process can be made better or easier, why not?
Nobody is saying Xara can't do amazing things and produce quality books like yours. That doesn't mean it can't be done better and isn't done better by other products.
I wasn't talking about an attack on Xara. Rather I posted how I use Xara for DTP work, and that I didn't care for how PagePlus process worked, then I was quoted in the defense of how InDesign works, even though I wasn't talking about InDesign at all. How one jumps from a discussion on Xara and PagePlus to defending InDesign, I don't know. Nobody is attacking Xara is far as I can tell.
That said, I'm fine with improving Xara DTP capability, but not by making it more like PagePlus, which I probably wouldn't use Xara at all (for DTP) if it were more like Pageplus - a process I don't like at all.
To me, making maps has nothing to do with DTP capabilities, rather it is vector drawing, use of bevels, shadows, transparency, color, image fills and some text placement.
Here's a DTP project I worked on using Xara - Frozen Wind (free PDF if you want to look...). As an aside, I also used Xara to create the map, and several of the art pieces, including the cover art, but those were vector drawing projects, and not what I consider desktop publishing.
No, creating artwork is not what I would consider to be DTP either, nor producing single or double sheet flyers, etc.
I don't think we even need to mention specific programs in order to suggest what could be improved about Xara. I deliberately avoided doing that.
@GP,
Then you are in luck. A drawing application can not ever be like any existing page layout application and so there is no worries that XDP would be like one.
@Paul,
While one could avoid mentioning specific applications, the features mentioned are not pulled out of thin air. What can be added already exists in one or more of these other applications. Mentioning X feature like Y application shouldn't cause any problems--either to forum users or the powers that be.
For instance, ID, AI, QXP, PP and CD all access OT Features differently. I think I can safely assume most users would like access to OT Features seeing how they have been available for around 15 years. Of those 5 applications I just listed, what makes most sense to me in what is primarily a vector application, is how CD accesses them. Completely intuitive, on-screen and on the fly. It's the most elegant means for what Xara applications are.
For instance, just adding a glyphs panel to access glyphs not otherwise accessible that exist in stylistic sets makes little sense. But that is how a fwe of the applications I list do so. PP and CD have better, quicker access. But how PP does so makes more sense in a layout application versus CD in a drawing application.
Mike
I've migrated the PDF and color output posts to here.
-g