Re: Structured FM versus Arbortext Editor

Subject: Re: Structured FM versus Arbortext Editor
From: Mark Giffin <mgiffin -at- earthlink -dot- net>
To: Scott Turner <quills -at- airmail -dot- net>
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:57:24 -0700

I have to differ about Arbortext and graphical display. Arbortext has graphical display of SGML and XML files that is fully equivalent to Structured FrameMaker. If your copy of Arbortext does not have a configuration for graphically displaying your DTD, then it won't look very good graphically. The same applies to Structured FrameMaker. If you try to display an SGML/XML file that FrameMaker does not have a configuration for, it won't look good.

Mark Giffin

On 8/16/2011 11:40 AM, Scott Turner wrote:

Think HTML on steroids. FrameMaker would probably work nicely for you. Arbortext editor will likely be more difficult for you to use since the display is primarily text without any visual formatting.

On Aug 16, 2011, at 10:26, "Peter Neilson"<neilson -at- windstream -dot- net> wrote:

Structured FM is easy, as long as you don't try to do anything outside the structure and you use a dual-monitor setup so you can see the structure and the text simultaneously.

Arbortext was a piece of cake last time I used it, long ago.

I'm suspecting you are ideally suited to the task.

Another possibility is emacs, because it can help you keep things balanced, but it's somewhat more roll-ypur-own.

On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:17:06 -0400, Michael Johnson<k7rvx -at- yahoo -dot- com> wrote:

Hi Folks,
In the near future the small company I work for will be creating new USAF tech orders in SGML for inclusion in a large database. From what I understand, aviation manufacturers, the military, and the IRS are among the few organizations that still use SGML technical content.
It looks like I will be the writer who will compose the SGML. I have read what few books are still in print on the subject, and have a rudimentary understanding of what's in store.
I am looking for recommendations on which editor to use. It looks like the options are structured FM and Arbortext editor. I already have FM9 and have a couple of years of experience generating unstructured FM, but the boss indicates he is willing to purchase the Arbortext editor and whatever technical support is necessary to get us up and running.
I would certainly appreciate any advice or war stories you are willing to share, particulary with classroom training from PTC (the inventors of Arbortext).
Mike Johnson
Syracuse, Utah


Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help.
Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need. Try
Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days.

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit

To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:

Structured FM versus Arbortext Editor: From: Michael Johnson
Re: Structured FM versus Arbortext Editor: From: Peter Neilson
Re: Structured FM versus Arbortext Editor: From: Scott Turner

Previous by Author: Re: Structured FM versus Arbortext Editor
Next by Author: FrameMaker 10 trial removes my Acrobat installation?
Previous by Thread: Re: Structured FM versus Arbortext Editor
Next by Thread: Re: Structured FM versus Arbortext Editor

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

Sponsored Ads