Hi @ia_7693:
I addressed this with you elsewhere, but will chime in with a little more detail to add to Jeff's excellent list, hoping to help others with the same question down the road. My additions are shown in blue.
TL;DR FrameMaker
Structured Authoring: no
FrameMaker is built for structured content, allowing authors to create distinct, reusable content components through tools like DITA (Darwin Information Typing Architecture).
Multi-File Book Management: These are more similar than the description below implies. We have books in InDesign, and can use multi-level auto-numbering for tables, figures and sections. InDesign does not support books within books (or hierarchal books). Both can generate a TOC, LOF, LOT, and index and manage those files for you. You can also sync book formatting commands, similar to File > Import > Formats in FrameMaker.
FrameMaker offers superior features for managing lengthy, complex, multi-chapter publications, including sophisticated options for numbering tables, figures, and sections across many files.
Advanced Cross-Referencing: Closer than this implies too. We have x-refs in InDesign, but it's an issue for a lot of people that we can't x-ref a paragraph number only—it can be the text or the number and text, but can't isolate just the number (FrameMaker's <paranumonly> building block). InDesign does display unresolved (broken) x-refs.
It provides more flexible and robust tools for adding and managing cross-references within and between documents, including the ability to display unresolved references.
Conditional Text: Not only is Conditional text more flexible in FrameMaker, including defining boolean expressions, FrameMaker handles text reflow after hiding/showing natively, where in InDesign you have to enable Smart Text Reflow, which has a learning curve for some.
FrameMaker's conditional text features are more advanced, allowing for content to be displayed or hidden based on specific conditions, which is crucial for creating different versions of a document from a single source.
User Variables: InDesign has variables and handles them in a similar manner to FrameMaker but—and this is a dealbreaker for many—it cannot break variables across lines. If you have a multi-line variable it will squish itself to fit on a single line, make the text completely illegible in the process.
The program supports more flexible user variables for storing information like product names, company details, or version numbers, which can be dynamically updated throughout a document.
Reference Pages: You could use the pasteboards to store graphics, or better yet, a CC Library to share assets with other documents, applications and co-workers. We use dialog boxes and not a reference page to store generated page formatting instructions—looks different, same end result.
FrameMaker uses "reference pages" to store graphics and other generated files, a unique feature not found in InDesign.
XML/DITA Editing: You can export to XML.
FrameMaker offers more advanced, built-in support for XML and DITA, enabling structured authoring and content reuse.
Robust Long Document Support: I do book work in InDesign and find it stable. But given the option, I'd select FrameMaker for technical document layout. InDesign is great for short, multi-story, colorful documents and has some amazing productivity features that I'd love to see in FrameMaker like nested styles and linked parent pages. FrameMaker is designed to handle documents with hundreds or thousands of pages, complex numbering, and multi-level indices without crashing, a major advantage over InDesign for technical manuals.
Finally, FrameMaker feels old because it is old. It's been around since the mid-80s. The sole reason it is still here is because it is still the best application for laying out long, complex technical documents.
~Barb
... View more
Rocky Mountain Training
AdChoices