TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
After posting a request last week for comparison docs, I received lots of
good responses. A few people requested more specificity as to context, so
I'm revisiting this question to pinpoint our major concerns and rephrase my
issues. We've used Word for many years but as we head toward content
management, it may be time to change authoring tools. A current desire is to
cut down on doc maintenance by enabling lengthy source documents to serve at
least three separate audiences. So the issues are:
How do Word and FrameMaker compare in terms of time required to do the
following:
* Use conditional text (or an alternative) to enable source docs to
serve various audiences. (Help is not an issue.)
* Handle various document types, most of which (a) contain numerous
graphics and tables, (b) require the use of autonumbering and autobulleting
and (c) run to several hundred pages in length.
* Manage multi-file documents ("books" in FM), including (a) search &
replace across multiple chapters, (b) reliability in handling page
numbering/sections/headers & footers, and (c) solid cross-reference, TOC and
index performance.
I'm asking for time-focused opinions because time translates to dollars and
that's what management is concerned with. For example, does one app take
less time than the other to perform a global search & replace across several
chapters? Specifics would be greatly appreciated because I'd like
quantifiable info on time expenditures--both initially and also in terms of
redoing or fixing. In your experience, which app is more efficient in each
of these areas? Also, do you have any advice on little-known problems that
can blind-side a tech writer? Have you created any helpful workarounds to
existing problems? Do you have any tips or tricks for either app that
increase its ease of use or reliability (both of which affect the time spent
using it)?
I'd like to approach this issue as a survey. If you want to contact me
off-list, I'll compile all feedback and submit a summary to the list that
may be of help to some of the rest of you.
Thanks for your wisdom (and generosity in sharing it),
Gay
____________________
Gay D. Alson
Technical Writer
NSB Group
galson -at- nsbgroup -dot- com <mailto:galson -at- nsbgroup -dot- com>
www.nsbgroup.com <http://www.nsbgroup.com/>
Tel: (514) 426-0822, ext. 2116
WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word features support for every major Help
format plus PDF, HTML and more. Flexible, precise, and efficient content
delivery. Try it today!. http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
