So your premise that it is 'a pleasure to use, and that it is being used' is flawed. I do not use AffPub, because it is much less user-friendly than the predecessor, has a less-inviting appearance, and singularly fails to provide the range of tools I require and find in PagePlus. It was ill-advised to axe one program before its replacement was anywhere near as versatile. I am a researcher, writer and publisher among other things. I would have thought there might be some lessons to be learned from the programming behind them, but I am not a programmer. Serif has axed PagePlus, in which the algorithms work well. It's fine until they get the feature working 100 per cent. I have avoided projects with footnotes and-where a choice was available-opted for endnotes and bit of elbow grease. Affinity Publisher is a robust product with most of the features I need. Even the demand for footnotes here confirms that the rest of the program's feature make it a pleasure to use, and that it is being used. While it seems that endnotes would be easier to achieve than footnotes, there is a relationship between them, and coding one feature independently of the other is laying the ground for future problems and QA headaches. Numbered footnote capability is a tricky feature since edits can affect the text flow and layout right through a long document. It takes time to build a robust product with a full array of features. The same was true of early versions of Quark Express. I was also happy to work with a very early version of MS Word (on the Mac before the PC version appeared) and that was lacking most of the features. A previous contributor to this thread referred to the first limited versions of InDesign, and I would agree. Having worked in software development I can only say that I'd vastly prefer to use a robust product with limited features than one that claims to have features but is buggy and crashes. I see why it may appear that way, but I try to be as honest as possible in all my dealings here on these forums, but without breaking company confidences, and I can honestly say this feature is not being held back, it is simply not ready yet. The Footnotes/Endnotes feature is not currently ready and so we cannot be fairly accused holding it back on purpose. I do not have a roadmap to publish but I hope I can say this here. I continue to want to make the leap from Adobe software, but for now I am using Scribus as I cannot bear the thought of giving Adobe any more of my hard earned money. Likewise, if they are expecting these features to remain quite a way off they should give us a roadmap in terms of when (timescale) and release (version number) they expect this to become available. If Affinity are planning on releasing version 2 with footnotes or endnotes they should simply say. I agree with previous comments: DTP without end/footnotes is not DTP. Given the amount of comments this feature alone has generated (90% uncomplimentary - being generous here) just shows the disappointment being experienced by users. That Serif cannot confirm one way or the other if/when it is appearing, equally so. The fact that the endnotes and/or footnotes do not even feature in a beta-test is dispiriting to say the least. Footnotes are a little trickier as this requires creating space for each page and juggling the content to accommodate them, but it still is not rocket science. It's really just collating all the footnotes into a table, creating a space at the end of the chapter, or book, and plonking the table there. Let me reiterate: implementing endnotes is not difficult. Is it possible that Serif are holding back this feature until v2.0 is ready? If so, then that is extremely pernicious. If your request is not in InDesign, and without diminishing its value, I would put it in one of the other categories and ask Serif to leave it out of its initial offering. (Earlier in the thread somebody said "If it doesn't have footnotes it is not a DTP!"). I would contend that AP should have been able to "factorise" footnotes from Day 1. If I use an analogy from algebra - early in our schooling we learned how to solve equations by factorising. Herein lies the rub! Where do we draw the line? Many contributions to this thread have asked for complex implementations of footnotes - very useful, but not part of (my idea of) a standard package. Note 24 must automatically change if i insert more notes
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |