Word and FrameMaker

Subject: Word and FrameMaker
From: David Mitchell <mitchell -at- SOLAR -dot- SKY -dot- NET>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 1995 23:33:18 +0000

A few days ago, I sent this directly to denise -at- TECSYS -dot- COM -dot- However,
it seems to be of general interest, so I am posting it to the list.

Denise asked about the relative merits of Word and FrameMaker.


------- Forwarded Message Follows -------

Before answering your question, let me tell you my background, as my
experience will surely color my answer. I am a senior technical
writer at a large mutual fund services company. In my department, we
produce software for a small number of clients (around 200). These
clients are mutual fund providers and insurance providers.

We produce manuals that range from 60-1000 pages. I consider a 200+
document to be a large document. I realize that you may be writing
documents that are much larger than this.

While I am a senior technical writer, I am senior only because of
technical expertise. I have only been with my current employer for 1
year, and I have only been a technical writer for two and one-half
years. I do, however, have experience with both Word and FrameMaker.

At my current job, we use Microsoft Word. Previously, we used
Ventura Publisher. At my last job, we used FrameMaker. Prior to
that, we used Ventura Publisher. Also, at my last job, we did draft
work using Microsoft Word.

Now, on to your question...

> My question, can you please tell me why, apart from the obvious, I
> would choose to use Word over FrameMaker, or vice versa.

> * Must be able to produce professional looking documentation;

Both can produce professional documentation. Frame has more
traditional typesetting controls and is a bit more powerful with
regard to page layout capability. However, I know from experience
that you can create complex and advanced pages using Microsoft Word
(and a good bit of patience ;)


> * Must be able to handle large volumes;

Frame is much better at this. Word bogs down at about 150+ pages
with text and graphics. Text only, about 400+. This is because
Word, by default, tries to keep the whole document loaded at one
time. There are a number of methods to work with larger documents in
Word, but Frame makes it easy.

Let me warn you, Master Documents in Microsoft Word will eat your
documents (at least in version 6.0a and 6.0c for Windows). If you
want more info, mail me back.

> * Must allow me to transform certain sections of the help into
> hypertext; therefore, it must allow me to create single source doc
> to some measure;

Ah, the siren song of single sourcing. My boss at my previous
employer shared your vision. This is one of the main attractions of
FrameMaker.

At the time, Frame did not have direct support for Windows Help. My
boss was able, however, to export the file to a MIF (Maker Info
Format) and read this text file into Word for processing. He then
converted the MIF to RTF for Windows Help. It worked, for the most
part. This was, however, a *very* intricate hack!!!

Word can go pretty easily to Windows Help, if you keep the goal of
writing so you are not specific to hypertext or print at the front of
your mind at all times. Otherwise, you will have to edit out all of
the references to "see above, below, preceeding, later in this
section..."

Frame also has conditional text, which is implemented fairly well.
We used it to create multiple manuals based off a single core. Well,
at least we produced a design and it worked in theory. In practice,
we started using conditional text, then copied the entire document to
a new file and edited from there. So there was a shared original
source, in a sense.

> * Must provide the conversion utilities required to port the files
> from DOS to Unix or vice versa. Other convertors would be nice:
> SGML, HTML, Mac...

Word dosen't provide DOS to UNIX out of the box. I am sure some
external formats are available. Frame has some converters, but I am
not sure how much.

Word's HTML export works fairly well. I use it for my Web
publishing. Expect to see some very exciting products from Frame as
they have teamed with Adobe after working on an HTML project
together. I think the product is called Adobe and Frame Publishing
Solution. (catchy name, eh?)

> * Must expertly handle multi-document features: headers, footers,
> indexes, table of contents, footnotes, cross-references, etc.
> * Must allow such multi-documents to be easily maintained.

Frame, Frame, Frame. If you are serious about big, complex
documents, do yourself a favor and get Frame. Microsoft Word is a
*great* Word processor. In fact, I often say, "You can have my copy
of Microsoft Word when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers." But,
it is just a word processor. Frame is a publisher. And a damn fine
one.

At my current job, we would use Frame. Our clients, however, demand the
electronic source files. Frame is to complicated for their staff, so
we chose Word. Our long document needs are a bit more humble than
yours, I suspect.

Both are excellent, however. I hope you get many responses. Please
summarize for the list! Good luck.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
David Mitchell (mitchell -at- sky -dot- net) David's Web Spot
GTW s+:- v+++ W++$>++++ po--- b++ e++ u-
www.sky.net/~mitchell/index.html


Previous by Author: Re: Tag markup going away?
Next by Author: Re: On-line help applications (Word)
Previous by Thread: Houston, TX Editor Required
Next by Thread: Pure Opinion: Tags and "Humanizing"


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


Sponsored Ads