Re: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word

Subject: Re: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word
From: "Mark Baker" <mbaker -at- omnimark -dot- com>
To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 11:56:55 -0500

Eric Dunn wrote

>
> If the FrameMaker template being used is set up properly, the DTP tasks
> performed by the writers is limited to virtually nil. If your writers are
using
> FM 60% of the time for layout and production then, sorry to say it, but
the
> process is inadequate and the template designer is incompetent.

The 60% figure comes from a study I did a few years back while working in a
documentation department in Really Big Corporation. It was based on months
of timesheet data. We were using Frame with well designed templates.
Templates are not the source of the problem, except in so far as a)
designing and maintaining templates contributes to time not spent writing
and b) learning how to design and maintain templates contributed to time not
spend developing expertise in writing and technology.

A 40% to 60% figure seems to be born out by other studies I have seen,
though I have not kept a bibliography, so I can't cite chapter and verse.

OTOH, if you have well designed templates developed by someone with real
template design expertise, someone who is a layout expert rather than a
writer, then you have taken at least one step in the right direction of
putting together a team of competent specialists, rather than a team of
jacks of all trades.





References:
Re: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word: From: edunn

Previous by Author: Re: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word
Next by Author: apologia pro vita sua (was Re: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word)
Previous by Thread: Re: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word
Next by Thread: RE: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads