There's a couple ways to fix that, import the .doc files, or just do a find " and replace with ". It will automatically convert all the quotes to curly quotes. You can do the same with apostrophes.

Sean -- Thanks for the reply. I realized that I didn't have

A) The "Microsoft OLE extensions" turned on for Classic B) The "Import MS Word" extension turned on for Quark

I had exported the sample DOC as TXT when I began this project. I was using InDesign at that time.

If you're trying to maintain tagged text, then it has to be imported as a plain text file. You can import a MSWord doc if you have the proper translation XTension.

Either way, when you select File > Get Text..., make sure you check the box in the lower lefthand corner of the navigation dialog box that says "Convert Quotes" before clicking Okay.

-- K.

Thank Kent. I know that others will continue to use Quark. I know I can count on that. In some way I feel like I'm home again, in some way I feel like I've taken a few steps back.

On that note. If anyone has any favorite typesetting tips-n-tricks for quark, I'd love those also.

Quite funny discussion!

You need to wrote a book, with a title such: "Indesign emulation in Xpress" or "Xpress for Indymmies" or "Xpress for Indesign users"

You're funny J-F P. While I don't doubt that InDesign is a better program, I am not enjoying the transition. I am finding it a struggle and quite uncomfortable. While Quark has its faults, they are familiar faults. I have been using Quark for about 12 years and it is now like breathing for me. Quark may not set great type right out of the box, but over the years I've developed an arsenal of tricks and custom shortcuts that allow me to quickly coax perfectly fine typography. And those skills are now honed to production speeds.

InDesign is going to set me back probably several months in terms of production. By which I mean that it will probably take me quite a while to get as fluent in InDesign as I am in Quark, to the point that I can be as productive as I am now. Ain't switching great :-/

Don't get me wrong. I'm pissed that Quark has turned its back on typographers by ignoring Unicode and OpenType. I used to appreciate the fact that Quark wasn't always upgrading and changing things on me every few months. But I hate them for these last non-upgrades. However, that doesn't mean I'm running to embrace the AdobeSoft monopoly either.

Tiffany -- My favorite trick, and I don't think a lot of people know this, so just between you and me... if you load the free TypeTricks XTension, then you can use the keyboard to track just the *word spacing* in a selection. This allows me to fine tune justification by loosening or tightening just the word spaces -- just like the old-timers used to do to justify handset metal lines, leave the letterspacing alone. This trick has been essential for me in getting control of fine spacing.

I have yet to figure out how you can get this kind of control in InD. If anyone knows how to track just the word spacing in InD, please let me know.

-- Kent.

On Win it's Str+Alt+ <- (Backspace)
On Mac there should be something similiar.
At least on my system this shortcut doesn't slow down the program...:-)

And Kent -- the switcheroo from QXP to ID shouldn't take you months, first because ID offers you the same keyboard shortcuts, if you want them (although I used the chance to come up with my own, which are in tune with FH and Photoshop). It took me about a week to switch, and during that I worked on projects with the software, so I had no formal training time at all. Having worked with Quark and Pagemaker before, it was rather like switching from a Beetle to a Beemer. And after you made the switch, the extended possibilities and flexibility in your work, as well as the higher efficiency in everyday work should save you LOTS of time. I know that I can do a 200+-pages book in less than a day (if need be), whereas with Quark it was always a matter of several days.
Switching, in this case, is great indeed.

You'll find that most of your tricks and custom shortcuts will also work in ID and -- with the right basic configuration -- won't be needed at all. ID plus Pro-OpenType-Fonts makes good typography almost too easy :-D.

Kent, I am just learning InDesign. I am not sure that this is what you want, but When you set up or modify paragraph styles, there is a tab that gives you a dialogue box for justification. It enables you to choose minimum, desired, and maximum settings for word and letter spacing and glyph scaling. The book 'Complete Manual of Typography' by Felici has nice examples of using these controls in his chapter on H & J. This is what sold me on upgrading from PageMaker.

Pongo -- thanks for the tip. I'll have to try that out and see if it behaves the way I want. I realize part of my problem is that the manual I have is for version 1, and it seems like some subtle, but important, key combinations and things have changed. But this is one that wasn't mentioned at all.

HD -- Thanks for the pep talk. I'm sure I'll get the hang of this in time, but I dislike learning curves. Those who know me can tell you: I'm usually a very quick study and quite good at picking up new skills. That's why I'm so surprised at how frustrating this transition is for me. i would have thought it would be completely smooth. But for some reason, that is just not the case here. It doesn't help that I have a lot of deadlines and just don't have the luxury to play around and learn; I need to get the designs built and on their way. So I usually just resort to launching Quark and going with the good ol' familiar.

William -- What you're describing is not what I was asking about. H&Js are old hat. But thanks anyway.

What I'm talking about is basically like tracking, but tracking that only acts on the word spaces. Many designers I have worked with are tempted to track the entire line when trying to manually finetune justification. However, because this works on letterspacing as well as word spacing, wholesale tracking distorts word shapes, especially when used in extremes. Pre-digital justification usually focused on adjusting only word spaces. That's the way I prefer to do it.

InDesign's multi-line algorithm does indeed make better justification and hyphenation decisions. And the controls are finer. But there are still places where I want to make a different decision from the program. It's only a computer, whereas I am a typographer and a reader. When that's the case I want to be able to manipulate those word spaces directly (short of manually kerning each one -- that's too tedious even for me!)

I do appreciate Indy's access to finetuning the balance of strikes for hyphenation versus justification. I wish, however, that it allowed me to actually interact directly with each variable, instead of that simplified "better spacing" slider.

-- K.

> Kent, what intrigued me about Felici's discussion of H & J is that he argues - with examples - that using a mixture of word and letter spacing *and* slight stretching or compression of glyphs that the result is better than any of the above alone. If you or others have seen his argument and examples, I be interested in your view of it.

>I wish, however, that it allowed me to actually interact directly with each variable, instead of that simplified "better spacing" slider.
In InDesign you have both the paragraph controls and the keyboard shortcuts to control separately both letter spacing and word spacing of highlighted text. You want cream on it also?

>In InDesign you have both the paragraph controls and the keyboard
>shortcuts to control separately both letter spacing and word spacing
>of highlighted text. You want cream on it also?

William --

A computerized justification routine works essentially by assigning a certain number of penalty points to each variable -- hyphenation, word space adjustment, and letter space adjustment. The program calculates every hyphenation and spacing possibility, applies the various penalties, adds up the scores, and selects the variation with the lowest score. Obviously, how the different variables are weighted will influence the decisions that are made. If hyphenation is given a higher penalty, then the program will seek to adjust spacing first; if spacing is given a higher penalty, then hyphenation will be the first line of attack.

In PM and Quark, the typesetter must accept the scoring scheme that the programmers decided. InDesign gives us arms-length access to these values through the slider in the Hyphenation dialog box. You can adjust the interaction between "better spacing" and "fewer hyphens." This is a great advancement.

I'm greedy, however; I would like direct access to the variables. Yes, generally speaking, hyphenation and spacing are a direct trade-off, and the slider represents that graphically. But if the routine is sophisticated, I expect that it's not just a matter of two interdependent variables. For instance, it might be possible to apply a lesser penalty to 5-letter hyphenation and a greater penalty to 2-letter hyphenation, so that the routine would generally favor hyphenation (and thus better spacing) but only use 2-letter hyphenation *after* all spacing adjustment was exhausted.

With due respect to the InDesign programmers, what's going on behind that slider does seem to be some sophisticated interaction with the hyphenation dictionary. I just wish I could see behind that curtain.

And yes, I would love some cream. Thank you.

-- Kent.

P.S. I'll have to re-read Felici and get back to you. Sorry, not enough time at present.

Kent: