Cross-Media in QuarkXPress and Adobe InDesign --McIlroy
This is a very different approach from Quark's. Who's right?
I have to say that although I wish that Quark was right, I actually agree more fully with Adobe's approach. As I wrote last summer, "the dream of cross-media grew out of the print community's sense of betrayal by the Web. After all our years of building a publishing craft, and even going to great lengths to digitize and automate that craft, here was the Web upstart quickly usurping our hold on graphic communication. We authors, designers, printers and publishers knew how best to communicate, how to assemble words and images into the most effective formats to inform and persuade. Who were these computer geeks who thought they knew better?"
We want to believe that print should dictate what appears on the Web. That's implicit in Quark's approach—that print designers will also control Web pages. It sometimes happens, but more often, as Adobe's approach suggests, each design team is separate, at best reusing some small portion of the other's work.
There's a third possible approach that no one has suggested yet: a solid Web publishing application with a print add-on, one that allows Web page designers to easily create some throw-away print brochures from their original electronic page designs. Now isn't that a frightening thought?
About the Author
Thad McIlroy is an electronic publishing consultant and analyst, based at Arcadia House in San Francisco. He welcomes your comments at email@example.com.