Hebrew fonts?

No, it is Yiddish for a "grandmother's tale" ...

- Dov

PS: Adobe is not going to sponsor a Talmud Typesetting project in InDesign. This thread is now ended ... Sof Pasuk!

> Nobody is currently using Adobe software to create a new edition of the Talmud. So, it is not harming any customers.

> Who says? I'm not in a position to disclose more information, but I can say for a fact that this statement is not true.

There is a clear and open contradiction here. Either, yes, Adobe InDesign is the superior typesetting program, ideal to produce this massive project,
or,
no, Adobe InDesign is a second rate typesetting program (unlike Adobe would like us to believe), not ideal to produce this massive project.

Here, it must be the best thing since the invention of the wheel, as it has in deed been selected over TAG for this massive project.

I believe Raphael is saying a bahbah-mahseh, an expression in Yiddish for wishful thinking. And InDesign ME is heads and shoulders more superior to TAG, and is worthy more than Quark or Ready, Set, Go, to create a new ever-lasting edition of the Talmud.

Goodness me Irwin, you are a persistent fellow. How about we say it like this:

Adobe isn't in that business.

Dave

Neil,

Thank you for your caring and thoughtful response.

Now, your reasoning has shifted here, even though the underlying sentiment response has been consistent. I believes the points of the issue can be logically addressed, and a different conclusion derifed, this though is closer to a case of "you can lead a horse to water, but you can not make him drink".

My nature is to persist until I overcome even where the odds indicate failure to succeed, but I am preoccupied with other matters now. Hence, I will respond later.

Irwin

Irwin,
>The end result would be a tangible testimony that the Adobe graphic art software accomplish a massive task of historical proportions. The Talmud is the most massive set of knowledge books, representing much of the body of Jewish wisdom that was ever created, containing more material than even Encyclopedia Britanica.

I appreciate the possible implication of such an endeavor. But it is not where Adobe should be expending its resources. Adobe is primarily a software developer, and a good one at that. As has been said, it is not a typesetter/printer.

I'm afraid that you are looking at the emotional aspects of the project, and not the end result. Although there certainly would be sincere appreciation for such an effort from a niche community, from a larger business perspective, it just is not a sound investment of Adobe's time and money. Return on such an investment would be (to be honest) minimal, regardless of the good press it might garner in this area.

Adobe's resources should be focused on Adobe's raison d'être -- software development, workflows and interfaces.

Neil

>Not correct. First, there are different versions of accepted Koran text. Its size is not massive. Adil Awalli of Ready Set Go in London has a superior product for the Koran that makes InDesign look inferior.

>Similarly, the Bible is a fraction in size of the Talmud, even including Hebrew Tanach, which Adobe customers are doing.

>Therefore, only the Talmud is the choice subject for all different reasons.

Sorry, I fail to see the logic. You are saying because Ready Set Go typeset a Qoran, therefore Adobe should typeset a Talmud? I don't really understand why RSG typeset a Qoran, but perhaps this was to prove that RSG can do this. However, there is only one set text of the Talmud so if Adobe were to do this, then yes, it would be in direct competition with it's clients, but again the question must be asked, Why? Why should Adobe typeset anything? Indesign is a proven product. The fact that I can typeset the Koren Tanakh in it without even thinking about it proves the point. What has InDesign got to prove?

>On the contrary, the various editions of the Talmud are being poorly created using non-Adobe dedicated custom software. This infers that InDesign is not capable of doing this massive historic project.

Again not true. Today editions of the Talmud are being created in Tag which has been designed to do such work and is far superior to InDesign in this particular respect. The results are absolutely fantastic.

Secondly, you have to recognise InDesign's limitations it's great for something but not for others.

Thirdly, Adobe's job is to create amazing software, not become typesetters. They create tools for typesetters. I'm not sure why you would think it's the job of Adobe to typeset anything be it a novel or the Talmud.

> Nobody is currently using Adobe software to create a new edition of the Talmud. So, it is not harming any customers.

Who says? I'm not in a position to disclose more information, but I can say for a fact that this statement is not true.

> Irwin,

Please step back for a moment and look at Dov's post from a purely business standpoint. Dov is correct. As nice as it might be for Adobe to provide the resources, it is simply not Adobe's place in the market, and it would compete directly with some of its customers.

Neil,

I humbly disagree with Dov's reasoning, with all due respect.

No customer would be harmed financially if Adobe created the Adobe Edition of the Talmud. On the contrary, the various editions of the Talmud are being poorly created using non-Adobe dedicated custom software. This infers that InDesign is not capable of doing this massive historic project.