Re: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word

Subject: Re: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word
From: iain -at- hairydog -dot- co -dot- uk (Iain Harrison)
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 18:17 +0000 (GMT Standard Time)

> Word is a fine word processing tool. It is limited publishing tool.
> Frame is a powerful, if wonky, desktop publishing tool. It is a
> terrible
> word processor.
> I am a writer. I process words. I prefer Word.

> If you are still stuck in DTP land then you are probably stuck in Frame
> land,

I agree with you in principle, but I'd just like to put in a word for
Pagemaker. In my view, the ideal is to create the copy in Word, and where
whizzo layout is needed, to use Pagemaker to do that part.

> but let it be said load and clear:
> Technical writing is about writing. Technical writers should not be
> asked to do DTP.

I can only go so far in agreeing with you. We live in a very visual
world. If the documentation isn't nice to look at, people won't use it.
The design and layout makes a difference. If there's no-one else to do
the layout, better to do it yourself than leave it undone.

In addition, it is fun. I spend a good proportion of my time designing
web and intranet pages, and creating the graphics for them. All work and
no play makes Jack a dull writer.



iain -at- hairydog -dot- co -dot- uk
iainh -at- cix -dot- co -dot- uk

Previous by Author: Re: British English technical variations
Next by Author: Re: Futur tense use in technical documentation
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