🚀 go-pugleaf

makes me feel like I�m coming from the world out there � the world of exuberant technological progress � to the world in here � the world of medieval mentality.    

Actually, your arguments show your ignorance. 

I have said FrameMaker could use up to, say, 9 levels of undo, but only single undo is most useful. I have said an editable history list would be much better then multiple undo. And, I have said there are improvements that should come before adding multiple undo, and multiple undo should not sacrifice resource use and application speed and requirements. 

Somebody said their purchase of FrameMaker hinged on it having multiple undo. I argued that the decision to use such software should be more broadly-considered. 

Somebody said multiple undo was necessary for designing a layout and templates. I offered that using tags and designers is more efficient. 

Somebody said multiple undo was necessary to get a document back to its original state after writing a bunch of prose that was not considered beforehand; that was spontaneous. And, while I agree multiple undo would be useful in this case, multiple undo quickly becomes less efficient than reverting to a previously-saved version of the document. 

Will the FrameMaker user go the way of the dodo? Probably only if FrameMaker does. I have used MS Word, PageMaker, and Ventura for many long, technical documents featuring lots of graphics, repeating style elements, and numbered lists. In only one of these, MS Word, did I find multiple undo useful, and that was to undo shortcomings in the application itself, such as its destruction of numbered lists and inability to layout floating graphics. 

You will find, if you get into long, technical documents professionally, that your skills will mature and your posts become less arrogant and rude.\ 

Sean