Skip to main content
J
JeffStevenson1-Visitor
1-Visitor
June 18, 2012
Question

Text Wrapping in Editor 6

  • June 18, 2012
  • 7 replies
  • 1674 views

Has anyone noticed differences in how text wraps to the next line in version 6 versus older versions? I'm seeing many differences between outputs from 5.3 and 6.0. I can't account for anything in the markup causing the difference. Has anyone else noticed this?

    7 replies

    S
    SarahPrice10-Marble
    10-Marble
    June 19, 2012
    Yes this was a major difference when we upgraded. I spent a lot of time adjusting indents on columns that use algroups and just basic step numbering. Anything that had side by side text.


    E
    ebenton1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    June 19, 2012
    Arbortext 6.0 formatter also seems to actually honor right-indents, where Arbortext 5.2 ignored this setting in our FOSI.
    S
    SarahPrice10-Marble
    10-Marble
    June 19, 2012
    Exactly. Arbortext 5.3 as well.


    A
    Anonymous
    June 19, 2012
    Great. Now I'm terrified to upgrade.

    Do you know know how much FOSI code I have written around their "dishonorable" indentation?
    S
    SarahPrice10-Marble
    10-Marble
    June 19, 2012
    Be afraid be very afraid.



    Also I don't know what graphic type you use but our biggest issue has been around graphics. We use .cgms. The IsoView application doesn't work as well as the Larson Utilities application they had in the previous versions. It is very slow and we have had problems with arbitrary crashes during publishing. A new release is expected to be out June 27 to correct the crashing but I still think there will be speed issues. A 5,000 page book with 2,000 graphics went from approximately 8 minutes to 2 ½ hours to publish. L!


    J
    JeffStevenson1-VisitorAuthor
    1-Visitor
    June 19, 2012

    Glad to hear I'm not alone...I think!


    I'm seeing wrapping differences throughout. I started noticing it in captions and then looked at normal text and the wrapping is different in almost every paragraph. Could it be hyphenation or widow/orphan control logic differences? I'm thinking there is no magic bullet for this one.


    On a side note, we had been using Acrobat document compares and it didn't catch any of the wrapping differences. Luckily, we also did a visual compare.



    In Reply to Sarah Price:


    Be afraid be very afraid.



    Also I don't know what graphic type you use but our biggest issue has been around graphics. We use .cgms. The IsoView application doesn't work as well as the Larson Utilities application they had in the previous versions. It is very slow and we have had problems with arbitrary crashes during publishing. A new release is expected to be out June 27 to correct the crashing but I still think there will be speed issues. A 5,000 page book with 2,000 graphics went from approximately 8 minutes to 2 ½ hours to publish. L!


    E
    ebenton1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    June 19, 2012
    We noticed very little text wrapping differences when comparing PDF files between 5.2-produced PDF and 6.0-produced PDF. Most of the line-breaking differences were in table cells. Editor 5.2 would allow unbroken table cell text strings to touch table cell borders and even overwrite into the next column/cell. Editor 6.0 does not allow this. It will break table cell text strings and allow proper cell padding wherever necessary.
    Terms & ConditionsCookie settingsAccessibility statement