when the entire support system for Indesign exists on the internet, why is this word not recognised by the Indesign inbuilt dictionary?
Further, I have auto-correct set to ON! Yet it's not correcting this to whatever it assumes is the correct spelling. Given that the listed suggestions when middle tapping are "Internet" or "INTERNET" why is it not auto-correcting to one of these? It's not like it could be some other word I'm trying to type.
So in Indesign Auto-Correct actually mean "Auto correct the words you've previously chosen to auto-correct, not autocorrect as you've come to know it in your browser, OS and all other popular places to type and write."
You have to work with a program as it is designed and not so as you suppose as it should be. And yes, I am happy, that InDesign has unlike MS Word or Outlook selfdefined automatism without my interaction. In InDesign the user can specify which word will be replaced automatically and that is important for the reliability for the output.
You should go back to the manual and read it first.
Perhaps you could attempt to find a manual in there. All I can find is a link to a manual that downloads "indesign_reference.pdf" file. So which is it? A reference file or a user manual?
What's most intriguing about this document is that it shows zero indication that the publishers of it actually used a program like Indesign to create it. It looks more like something made with Markup. And I don't dare suggest a designer has been involved in its creation, because that's not the case.
It has neither an Index or a Glossary, two things one might rightfully expect in a User Manual.
Yet it's not structured like a Reference.
Are my expectations of documentation a little high?
Are my expectations of documentation a little high?
No, they are not.
But you already have discussed that with Peter Spier in the other thread…
Speaking about documentation: Adobe can do better. There is proof for it in the Adobe Digitial Publishing (DPS) sector for InDesign. You may have a look at Bob Bringhurst's (Adobe staff) collection at:
Another example for DPS is:
But I must confess, that PDF documentation in regards of the all new v27 of DPS is still missing (ok. that release is just a few days old…) and that v26 of the PDF documentation lacks some structure elements like "table of contents", page numbers and some typographical standards used in older versions. (Indexing topics was never included…)
Maybe it would be a good idea to start a new thread about InDesign's documentation here in the forum.
At best it would be a "sticky" one at the top of the forum overview.
And I've brought it up again because Willi has specifically mentioned a manual. Twice. And suggested I read it at least as many times.
If the indesign_reference.pdf is what I'm supoosed to be reading... I'm not sure I'm up to it. That thing is a mess.
So I've downloaded the Indesign CC, installed... and it's sending me to the same set of pages online, the same mishmash of discombulated ... well, I don't really know how to describe this other than it looks like a junior high school project: http://helpx.adobe.com/indesign/topics.html
You're confusing me with this DPS stuff. Why do I need that if I've got Indesign, which is apparently able to publish to the iPad?
On the Indesign docs...
Maybe it would be a good idea if Adobe spent some of its record profits on paying people to actually make documentation, rather than leaning on the community. I know, radical idea, right?
Willi you'll be happy to know that Indesign CC has some already filled in AutoComplete contents. Wow. What an idea.
Next upgrade they'll put an option in to use the OS dictionary and Autocorrect. Imagine that!
I kind of got that... but I'm still a little generally confused about what DPS actually is. Why do they rave on and on about its ability to publish to iPad?
Can it do anything that Indesign can't in terms of publishing to iPad?
DPS in essence is a special case. At least for users of versions CS5 and CS5.5: Two special plugins by Adobe with extra functionality and a complex workflow to bring contents to the iPad (and other devices) as Apps.
DPS is more deeply integrated with InDesign CS6 and CC and installed together with InDesign. For CS5 and CS5.5 it is a separate install. If you are using CC, you cannot have an install for InDesign without DPS functionality.
DPS plugins are constantly updated every 6 to 10 weeks. Currently we are at version 27 of the tools…
I know that InDesign CC has some autocorrect content, but only in its English dictionary. I suppose that I knwo it qute longer than you do.
I am happy that it will not have an option to use an OS or MS dictionary fo autocorrect, because these features in iOS and MS programs are terrible dangerous for correct writing.
Now now. No need for that.
Perhaps you've never written anything. nor noticed that near half a billion wouldbe writers and a million real ones use Microsoft Word, with Autocorrect on.
But don't let facts like that bother you.
You might be right, for a rare few, turning off the assists might mean they can write faster. For the rest of us....
A couple of things...
First, there is actually a forum view that highlights what it considers misspelled words, which in my case is a good thing because I'm the world's worst typist. It doesn't auto-correct, and it loses some other functionality, though, that I considered essential so I turned it off and I don't remember how to get it back.
But don't put the blame for what the forum looks like on Adobe programming. We actually had a really funtional forum for many years, but it didn't integrate with social media and was hard to expand becasue it was completley custom coded. Corporate made a decision to switch to a hosted forum service, they picked Jive, and an older version at that, for mostly monetary reasons I expect, and that's the end of the story.
Auto-correct isn't a feature I even have turned on. I don't want software thinking it knows better than I do what I intended to type. That used to drive me absolutely crazy trying to write code for one of my programming classes in Word. Most longer text is is written outside ID and imported, and auto-correct inside ID doesn't function in that scenario, though you are certainly free to use a word-processor where it does.
Frankly, I don't see a problem with having to build the dictionary of correct spelling if you want to use auto-correct in ID, but, as I said, I don't use it. Auto-correct and spell check both lead to serious errors because we come to think they are a substitute for actual proof-reading.
I'm guilty of being a little "new school" in this regards. I type a lot, mostly explaining stuff and demonstrating stuff, and illustrating points and ideas, thoughts and concepts, structures and paradigms of approaches and **** like that. Really utter nonsense, more than anything... and I utterly rely on spell check auto-correct. I actually use it much more like an Auto-Complete than autocorrect. Such is my reliance on it.
There's a certain joy to structuring words to a space, that's part of a design vanity and aesthetic that means little to few. But those times that I've used that approach in Indesign I'm stuck wondering how my spelling is doing. Because my spelling, mostly, sucks.
It would be REALLY nice, to have an option, apart from these other options, to use the OS (in this case Mac OS X) spell check throughout Indesign, in addition to the and concurrent with the custom library of personal spell corrections. In this manner it could be like Microsoft word, in the sense that the auto-correct of Indesign can be used like a "macro" and the OS auto-correct (which I've trained heavily to my words and way of expressing myself) can be running "as normal".
I find it a little strange that a layout program doesn't have this ability to use the host OS's spell check, because I can't be the only designer that's both using the layout features of Indesign and generating the content that goes into that layout. And it's completely undesirable to be swapping between a word processor, or even the inbuilt editor of Indesign, when I would much rather see my words go where they're going to be, live, and auto-corrected in whatever manner I choose.
But, there you go. My two cents on something it appears nobody else cares about, thinks about or works like.
As to programming, yes, I fully understand, the words and phrases and keywords from that... you'd need a while to train word processor style environment to deal with that. I have often wondered why code editors don't learn from the auto-completes of word processors, and vice-versa.
I really like the way Xcode does Objective-C suggestive completion, for example. That's unbelievably fantastic, particularly for someone like me that knows very little programming and even less of Foundation and CocoaTouch etc. I don't have to keep going back to the docs, just need to start with the first few letters of the method/class and go from there... it's basically helping me write the line from there.
Imagine a word processor like that...