Mad About Word and FrameMaker

Sometimes when I use one of the tools, I wish the other had the same feature. I often wistfully wonder (and sometimes go/get mad)—

• Why doesn't FrameMaker have this Word feature?
• Why doesn't Word have this FrameMaker feature?
• Why can't blah do this task like blah-blah does?
• Why does blah make this task so much harder than blah-blah does?
• Would it kill blahtool to simplify some frequently used task by having a shortcut keystroke set instead of the user needing to constantly go to a menu and open one or more series of dialog boxes, select choices, and click OK in each of the boxes?
• For some other frequently used task that opens a dialog box, can more options be on the same dialog box instead of needing to open secondary dialog boxes?
• Can blahtool provide lots more task dialog boxes with preview capabilities instead of the current (seemingly) paltry few? (Example implementation: Preview, then click Apply. Click OK when happy with the view.)

I know some uberusers have encyclopedic memorization of shortcuts, and I wish I had that familiarity and proficiency. Unfortunately, I work with the tools just often enough to have memorized a smaller set of shortcut keystrokes. With some commands that are more obscure than others, I often Google for finding how-to's.

Over time that I've used FrameMaker and Word, I've thought, "I wish FrameMaker had [feature] or was as easy to [do something] as Word", and vice versa. Here is my list of features for comments and wishes.

Zoom View
I like FrameMaker's click zoom in and out and menu. It would have been nice If Word's magnifier icon provided dynamic zoom—Have right click zoom in and left click zoom out where the cursor is. Instead, the magnifier click method requires three clicks each time I want to vary zoom percentage.

*** New news (Mar. 5)! I discovered that Word does have dynamic zoom! The lower right part of the window has a slide switch. You can click and drag the slider, or you can click the plus and minus for incremental sizing. Woohoo!

Find
Would really like it if Word had just put in forward and backward options on the initial dialog box instead of requiring a click on More. (On March 11, a commenter mentioned a Word Find feature for simple forward/backward. Turns out Word 2010 has it. Word 2007 still uses the click-More method.) I like Frame's Forward and Backward options being on the Find dialog box. I like Word's search term buffer so I know what I've searched for previously, especially if I want to search for the term(s) again. If only FrameMaker had the same capability!

Bullets and Numbering
I really like FrameMaker's capability. What you set up is what you get. The capability for a start number or letter, and separate capabilities for subsequent number or letter—flawless. Word's seeming unpredictability for numbering, indentation, and reversion has been a source of aggravation for me for years.

Format Painter
One of my favorite Word features. Select some text (usually line or paragraph), and "paint" the format onto something else. Much quicker than using even a Frame paragraph catalog selection, particularly if I have LOTS of styles, which often requires scrolling to the style I want.

Paste Special
Love being able to use Frame's Shift+Ctrl+v. Word had put Paste Special into the ribbon, prominently. However, it's not as convenient as Shift+Ctrl+v. C'mon, Microsoft. Even Open Office has that shortcut key combo.

Copy and Paste for Images
Both Frame and Word irk me when they offset the results of paste. Can either one of them implement a feature so that the to-be-pasted object sticks to the cursor until you actually do a followup click that releases the object where you want it?

Moving Images Around
Word seems much more friendly for setting up grid snap and scooting images (nudge). Press arrow buttons for moving images in increments.

Inserting Symbols
FrameMaker's offering is like looking at a nickel display case. Word provides a buffet, particularly for inserting special characters. I like finding the symbol I want right in the tool.

Formatting Images
I like Word's simplicity for formatting images. The ribbon version is ok, although I liked the older menu version better for simplicity. It seems I need to use more clicks to get to all the commands I want—size/position are now separate from Format Picture.

OTOH, Word's feature for the image to resize while I click spin box values is nice. Percentages and dimensions are chained together (as default options). Images scale up or down as previews. I can stay in the dialog box for previewing the results. It's like try before you buy.

FrameMaker! It's exhausting to constantly open the Graphics > Scaling dialog box and not have the length and width change when I change the scale. And no option to lock the aspect ratio or relative-to-original size option.

Arrowheads
Word's feature for arrowheads seem easier for shape, size, and direction than Frame's implementation. The only thing I prefer about Frame's arrowhead feature is the ease of selecting the arrow direction.

Tables—Borders and Shading
I find Word's table Borders and Shading dialog boxes very friendly and intuitive, but FrameMaker's clunky and unfriendly. Word provides previews of results.

Tables—Cell-splitting
Word's way is select a cell and split it. FrameMaker requires adding a column or row, then straddling cells. I think FrameMaker's difficulty with easy splits might have something to do with conditionalizing.

Tables—Column Width
I like Word's dialog box for changing column width and previewing when i click Next Column. I really dislike FrameMaker's lack of any sort of preview. It's exhausting reopening the table-width dialog box several times because I don't guess correctly about the width I wanted and how my selection affects the rest of the table. However, I really like FrameMaker's very easy shortcut for resizing the column width to text width—Esc t w (as in tech writer).

FrameMaker Features Only
Ahhh, if only Word had these features that only FrameMaker has!

Overlines
Word just plain doesn't do them. Showing active-low signals is easy with FrameMaker as simply another checkbox option. Word is a disaster waiting to happen if drawing a line over text.

Continuation Variable
One great FrameMaker feature is the continuation variable for the table heading title (aka table caption). Inserting the var ensures that a table that spans more than one page displays "continued" (however the FrameMaker user wants to define the text). The reader knows the table is a continuation, not a new table.

Conditionalizing
FrameMaker makes it easy to do variations of documents for hiding and showing text, figures, tables, table rows. FrameMaker's table rows conditionalizing capability might be the reason why implementing cell splits is difficult. Word doesn't do conditionalizing—oh, sure, maybe in some very primitive way. Comparing the two would be like comparing hopping on one leg to driving a car to get to a driving distance destination.

Importing Formats
FrameMaker's feature has loads of attributes for copying from one document to another. (I use this most often with book files.) Open a file that has attributes and also files for copying attributes to, (Click-shift to select.) In the dialog box, select the "model" file (Import from Document), the attributes to copy (Import and Update), and click Import. Word doesn't do import formats.

Both tools have a secondary means of "importing" formats, but rather primitive, and sometimes it works, and sometimes not. Try copying a style from one file to another if the other file does not have a style with the same name. With both files open, copy an entire paragraph, with paragraph mark, from source to destination. The destination file now includes the source's paragraph style name and style characteristics.

Word features I Wish FrameMaker Had or Had More of
I've noted some of the features in passing, but the following features run throughout in Word that makes me appreciate Word over FrameMaker.

Split/Merge Screen
Word's feature makes it very convenient for copying and pasting items from one part of a document to another. I can copy from the first screen, paste to the second screen, and click the first screen where I left off. Another good use is inserting cross references that originating phrases or icons are all in one spot, which can sit undisturbed in one screen while I hunt for the target that I want to cross reference to.

Spin Boxes
Set field values by clicking arrow buttons for incrementing numbers up and down. Even better, preview the effects. Yes, this is related to images.

Preview Dialog Boxes
View thumbnailish representations of changes before clicking OK, particularly pertinent to images and tables.

What's your madness about FrameMaker and Word?

Wordle Word Doodle

I’d been interested in Wordles since sometime last year when I encountered the term in a forum. I was so unfamiliar with the term, I initially thought it was Wordie. Wordles have been described as word clouds, from shapes that words would form.

A wordle takes all the words in a text and writes them in the form of a word cloud, using colours or different size letters to show how frequently words are used in that text

My thought is that it’s a blended word, Word + Doodle combined into Wordle. (Take a side trip for more word-blend explanation and view blended words lists.)

The prominent name associated with Wordle creation is Jonathan Feinberg, who created the algorithms and the web application. You can dive right in to the Wordle site, click Create, and follow the instructions. For my own featured Wordle images, I used text from my Texas towns article. (The pixstrip at the top of my article shows an image with the text all vertical, rotated clockwise 90 degrees, and redisplayed as horizontal and rescattered.) The initial Wordle window opened and showed buttons for changing the looks: Edit, Language, Font, Layout, Color. The graphic had the following settings:

• Language
  Remove numbers
  Leave words as spelled
  Remove common English words
• Font
  Teen
• Layout
  Rounder edges
  Vertical
• Color
  Milk paints
  A little variation

Clicking the Randomize button at the bottom of the screen resulted in a combination of changes.

• The Language settings were the same.
• The Font changed from Teen to Goudy Bookletter 1911.
• The Layout settings changed to Rounder Edges and Mostly Horizontal.
• The Color settings changed to the Indian Earthy palette, but still a little variation.

For one more look, I decided to change the Layout orientation to horizontal and Color palette to B/W. Note that the largest words are "Community" and "Lake". Frequency affects the size of the words in a Wordle; the Texas towns article has 16 instances each of "Community" and "Lake".

I've summarized the row of commands that are at the top of the interface as follows:

Edit: Edit has the choices of Undo (Ctrl+Z) and Redo (Ctrl+Y), and they function similarly to browser Previous and Next. The Edit command is a lot more fun after you generate several looks to revisit.

Language: Most of the forced-choice options pertain to removal of common foreign-language words. A few choices are significant for filtering, such as number removal y/n, character case, and removal or not of common words. The common words options are available for 29 languages.

Font: You can play with 32 fonts. It's nice that simple clicking generates the image immediately rather open a window where you require another one or more commands. I found the Owned font to be interesting for the script look with all the characters sized the same. And the Language (case) options have no effect, as though the characters have one case definition.

Layout: Clicking the first choice, Re-layout with current settings, is like randomizing the looks. Continue clicking Layout > Re-layout with current settings until you see a really eye-catching image that you want to capture and save. An extension of using the feature might be setting a graphics program to capture screens in intervals as you continuously click Layout > Re-layout with current settings. Then combine all the screens to create a slide show.

Color: You can pick palette offerings, or make up your own. The default ones primarily have either black or white backgrounds. The results generate immediately, similar to the Language output.

Get moving on your own Wordles! For additional resources, besides the Wordle home site, visit the following sites:

Jonathan Feinberg
Wordle Blog
Weaving Words with Wordle: A Talk with IBM’s Jonathan Feinberg, by Wade Roush 3/16/09

Youtube videos:

• From bochi23
  • wordle - part 1: the basics
  • Wordle - Part 2: Extending Wordle a Bit More
• From Kicode2
  • Wordle tutorial
  • Wordle tutorial part 2

DIY Bizcards and Name Tag

Attending meetups and attaching sticky-back name tags that you print or write your name on? Attending meetups and NOT having any name tags at all? Prepare for the next event by making your own tag and also having your own DIY business cards. Visit https://www.box.net/shared/usayfv8pv4, download my Word file, and modify it using instructions farther down in this article.

When I attended a networking meetup about a week ago, I received compliments about my name tag as I introduced myself. The tag was black on white, business-card size, double-side-tape attached to a paper trade-show card—all tucked into a clear, trade-show badge. I explained that I had attended so many networking events that I made up my own name tag.

As a writer, I considered the appearance of my tag to be an opportunity to display typography know-how. The tag displays my name and occupation, readable for type size and type face. Furthermore, I inserted Webdings that I felt symbolized my occupation—computer, sheet of paper, open book, stack of books, world globe, spider, and spider web. For subtle grouping, I enclosed a dotted rectangle around the globe, spider, and web.

The name tag is one of 10 cells that fit on a 2 x 5 grid, suitable for printing onto perforated card stock, commonly available at office supply stores. (Do a Google Image search for "perforated business card paper" to see packaging.) My process represents an alternative to getting business cards from Vistaprint and similar companies. And you also get a name tag as a bonus. With the Word file I have made available at https://www.box.net/shared/usayfv8pv4, anyone can use it to create their own business cards and name tag.

Instructions

1. Download the file and save it to your drive.
2. Edit each line of one business card cell to suit yourself. Save the file.
3. Select and copy that cell's information to your clipboard.
4. Paste the information onto one of the business card cells to see if the pasting looks good.
• If the pasting is good, continue to paste the information onto the other eight business card cells.
• If the pasting is not good, undo the paste. You might need to copy/paste special, line by line.
5. Modify the name tag cell as you wish. Save the file.
6. Print a test copy of the file onto plain paper. (Don't worry about the paragraph markers, non-printing symbols, and borders printing. They won't.)
7. Overlay the paper over a perforated card stock sheet, checking that the information aligns and also that each cell's information is well within its borders.
8. Adjust information alignment and looks as necessary.
9. Print the file onto a sheet of the perforated business card stock.

Suggestion: Save the file under a slightly different name. Copy a business-card cell, replace the name tag cell, and save the file so you have a file with only business cards.

For those who want to consider name tags that attract more attention than static ones, get one that scrolls. In my article—"Inventions Running Around the Blockhead"—I mention scrolling name tags (accompanied by URLs) and someone who has created her own to wear at events.

PDF2W--Converting PDF to Word-recognizable Format

You have a PDF file that you would like to convert to .doc or .rtf and you don't have access to an Adobe Acrobat version that will. How to convert for cheap? Even better, how about for free? Try two free online converters—Free File Converter (.pdf to .doc) and PDF Online (.pdf to .rtf). I have tried both procedures using an experimental PDF file, listed results for both tools, and discussed the results.

Free File Converter

1. Visit http://www.freefileconvert.com/.
2. Click the Convert File tab.
3. Browse to your input file, a pdf in this case.
4. Select the output format, doc in this case.
5. Click Convert. Wait as instructed.
6. On the new screen, click the file link to open it.

In my own case, my converted .doc file opened as a read-only file and had hard breaks at every line instead of line wrap. It also showed weird lines (correlated to no-longer-functioning hyperlinks) across some of the text. Just as an experiment, I did a save-as to the desktop. I closed the newly saved-as file, then re-opened it to view the actual new results.

The doc file ended up with extra pages, far beyond my experimental doc file of two pages. My observations:

• The converted PDF-to-doc file wound up as six pages:
• 1st page totally blank
• 2nd page with lines that had correlated to the hyperlinks and an image that had been on the first page
• 3rd page with content from original 1st page with no-longer functioning hyperlinks
• 4th page also totally blank
• 5th page also totally blank, but with some weird anchoring
• 6th page with content from the original 2nd page
• The page header converted to regular text.
• The font appearances and section breaks stayed.
• Style names and table formatting didn't carry over.

Cautionary note about Free File Converter results: If your PDF file has anything besides line-breaking text, you can kiss everything else good-bye—line wraps, headers (and presumably footers), tables, selectable images, styles. If you care to apply the PROPER techniques to obtain the looks (not just settle for the looks), you can be looking at all sorts of formatting and adjusting.

PDF Online

• Visit http://www.pdfonline.com/pdf2word/index.asp.
• Click Browse, then browse to your input file, a pdf in this case.
• Click Upload and Convert. Wait as instructed.
• Click the right-click here link to download the zip file.
• In the dialog box, save the zip file to your drive. Extract (uncompress) it. View it.

My observations:

• My PDF converted to rtf.
• Almost all my content turned into tables with extra columns.
• Hyperlinks no longer worked.
• Image was no longer selectable at all.
• The page header converted to regular text.
• The font appearances stayed.
• Style names, table formatting, and section breaks did not carry over.

Cautionary note about PDF Online results, which are similar to Free File Converter results: If your PDF file has anything besides line-breaking text, you can kiss everything else good-bye—line wraps, headers (and presumably footers), selectable images, styles. Table modifications could be a major issue. If you care to apply the PROPER techniques to obtain the looks (not just settle for the looks), you can be looking at all sorts of formatting and adjusting.

Using Free File Converter vs. PDF Online

The major contrast between these two converters is that PDF Online didn't add extra pages. If you want to convert for only looks, the PDF Online results file would probably be easier to work with than Free File Converter results file. You should try both free converters and decide which one to go with.

Free File Converter does all sorts of file conversions, including image formats. Now, here's my shameless plug where I cite Free File Converter and numerous other handy online tools—Tooling Around, at http://whilldtkwriter.blogspot.com/2010/05/tooling-round.html.