Re: Tony's Wonderful Frame Project

Subject: Re: Tony's Wonderful Frame Project
From: Peter Gold <pgold -at- NETCOM -dot- COM>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 11:56:33 -0700

My $.02:

Lengthy Frame or other product-specific material would probably be better
posted on such newsgroups as comp.text.frame, comp.text.interleaf, etc.
There's also a framers mailing list (also available as a digest):
Subscribe by sending mail to majordomo -at- math -dot- mcgill -dot- ca with subscribe
framers (or framers-digest) in the subject line.

On Sat, 6 Apr 1996, Bill Bledsoe wrote:

> Ditto from this end of the world!!!! Great job Tony. Frame has a new nickname around here with version 5...

> "the most user-hostle application available for commercial sale today"

I thought about not responding to this comment, but then changed my mind,
hoping to perhaps change yours, or at least your perspective. If you
expect <product name here> to plug into your brain and intuition, previous
ingrained experience with some other product and its interface and
metaphors, or to make hard work disappear, then you're likely to bash any
product that doesn't meet this expectation.

All products that are used in what I call "The industrial information
manufacturing assembly process", what most people call "tech pubs" for
short, are hard to master because the process is hard to master. I train
technical writers and engineers to use FrameMaker. By comparing the
manufacturing of information to the other things they manufacture, such as
hardware and software, it becomes clear that the tools are there to do
the required tasks.

Around 1984, I read an article about using database products, in the
Minneapolis computer paper. It was called "Clubbing Data" and it began to
make clear to me why it seemed so hard to get ducks into a row. It's
because it's hard to get ducks into a row. The right tool makes it
easier, but one must learn *BOTH* the tool and the tasks one expects the
tool to do.

As the doctor tells the patient who complains, "It hurts when I do this ",
"So, don't do that!", if it hurts when you use product 'x' to do job 'y',
and other products are not permitted, or available, or aren't better,
then maybe it's job 'y' that hurts when you do it, and maybe "don't do
that!" is the best solution.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Signatures in the mirror are closer than they appear.
Peter Gold pgold -at- netcom -dot- com
Disclaimer:
I am a FrameMaker trainer working for an independent Adobe/Frame VAR.
My opinions and comments priced at $.02 and up are my own.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *



> Hopefully some quality input will change that.

> cheers,

[snipped]

> From: Tim Altom[SMTP:taltom -at- IQUEST -dot- NET]
> Sent: Saturday, April 06, 1996 8:12 AM
> To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L
> Subject: Tony's Wonderful Frame Project

> I just want to express my gratitude to Tony for the work he's done
> assembling the wish list and getting it to Frame/Adobe. You've done all of

[snipped]


Previous by Author: Technical design or ?
Next by Author: Re: Re[2]: DTP and Writing (and related)
Previous by Thread: Re: Tony's Wonderful Frame Project
Next by Thread: Re: Tony's Wonderful Frame Project


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads