Re: Framemaker? (from techwr-l)

Subject: Re: Framemaker? (from techwr-l)
From: Kent Dannehl <kdannehl -at- STARFISHSOFTWARE -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 14:14:00 -0800

None of the major publishing houses use Word for print doc...
It simple does not behave well enough. Frame and Quark are the
most common.

kent

----------
From: Tony G. Rocco[SMTP:trocco -at- NAVIS -dot- COM]
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 1996 1:51 PM
To: TECHWR-L
Subject: Re: Framemaker? (from techwr-l)

At 13:05 -0800 12/4/96, Wing, Michael J wrote:

>><snip>
>>Tony should climb down off his horse.

>Isn't he the same guy that recently said something to the effect of,
>"I'm glad my degree puts me a step ahead of the Tech Writing Pack" ?

Yes, Michael, I am the same guy who made a statement to that effect, with
no regrets.

As to my FrameMaker comments: I was not on a "high horse." (It was just a
short pony.) Nor was I defending FrameMaker. In fact, I am very critical
of
FrameMaker, as my colleagues at work will well attest. I was merely
making
the point that FrameMaker, like it, love it, or hate it, *is* one of the
most commonly used apps for producing print documentation by tech
writers,
probably the single most common. It seems odd, wouldn't you agree,
Michael,
that someone going to school to learn a skill would never even hear of
one
of the most commonly used tools by practitioners of that skill?

- tgr

____________________________________________
A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely
rearranging their prejudices.
-- William James



Previous by Author: Jesse's right [was Ebonics]
Next by Author: Re: Survey: Which DTP do you use?
Previous by Thread: Re: Framemaker? (from techwr-l)
Next by Thread: Re: Framemaker? (from techwr-l)


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads