Re: Is Sandcastle any better for conceptual topics?

Subject: Re: Is Sandcastle any better for conceptual topics?
From: Bill Swallow <techcommdood -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: Paul Goble <pgcommunication -at- gmail -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 09:55:36 -0400

> My goal is to add a half dozen introductory topics and some short "getting
> started" tutorials. I don't see a way to add such information in the code
> comments--it would end up buried in some part of the API reference, and
> formatting options would be limited.  (Or is there a way?  I'm just starting
> out with Sandcastle.)

Ah, yes. Separate topics like that can get lost in the API. We'd add
conceptual info into the namespace topics, but tutorials and such were
different. We created a separate Help file for those and added it to
the core TOC that was consumed by the installer for integration into
the target IDE.

> Using MAML seems to be the "official" approach and it would let me stay with
> a single tool. But I worry that once I commit to it, I'll find that MAML is
> still basically undocumented.  On the other hand, learning a new markup
> language would be fun *if* at long last all the critical information is out
> there somewhere.
>
> The 2-tool approach isn't as pretty, but I'm 100% confident that it will
> work and that it'll be easy to pass on to another, less-technical writer if
> necessary.

We maintained non-API reference in Framemaker and used WWP to
single-source to multiple outputs. The Help output was included in the
Help2 main TOC and consumed by the installer for VS integration, so
all the info - from code or not - was available in the API Help.

--
Bill Swallow
Content Solutions Manager
GlobalScript, a division of LinguaLinx
http://globalscript.com
http://lingualinx.com

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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.

http://bit.ly/doc-to-help

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

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-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com


Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives


Previous by Author: RE: Bullet Styles
Next by Author: Re: LinkedIn phishing?
Next by Thread: TechWhirl: Technical Communications Recap for June 1, 2012


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads