🚀 go-pugleaf

[I intended to send this only to Steve, but his email address isn't working]
[If you absolutely must reply publically, consider starting a new thread]

> It might be the behaviour, but it isn't right!
> If Adobe is aware of this, why have they not put something in the user
guide?
> Is this something that Adobe are intending to address?

Welcome to the world of Adobe. Features, bugs and documentation are only
going to be addressed or improved if there's a significant number of
users affected (meaning one of the major license holders complain), or
if the correction will lead to increased sales. Each correction is a
"business case" in itself.

It doesn't matter if a feature is badly designed or missing, or if
information in the User Guide is missing or misleading. The quality in
itself is not a matter of concern when deciding on what changes to make.
There's of course always a matter of making priorities when you have a
large number of issues to address with limited resources, but it's quite
interesting to note that certain bugs and issues *never* get addressed,
no matter how long they've been around, how irritating they are to the
users, or how embarassing they are for Adobe.

If this sounds harsh, it's simply a matter of observing how Frame/Adobe
has managed the product and the releases for the past 10 years. People
from Adobe, and very Adobe-friendly users, will not agree with me, but
you only need to look at how Save As PDF was implemented and documented
starting with FM 5.5 to see there's a point in my assessment.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Thomas Michanek, FrameMaker/UNIX/MIF expert
Technical Writer, Uppsala, Sweden
mailto:Thomas.Michanek@telia.com
http://go.to/framers/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -