Re: Documentation Group needs advice!

Subject: Re: Documentation Group needs advice!
From: Beth Mazur <mazur -at- MAYA -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 16:03:46 -0500

At 12:41 PM -0800 1/3/97, Paul Nagai wrote:

>I am not a PageMaker user, so I don't speak from my own experience, but the
>discussions I've seen here and on framers focus on Frame's superior ability
>to handle, among other things: table of contents, lists of tags, lists of
>tables, lists of figures, robust indexes, etc....all things that are going
>to be required in Marlene's 100,000 pages (if I remember the figures
>correctly) of documentation...are handled gracefully by FrameMaker.
>PageMaker, if it supports these functions, doesn't support them as robustly.

>...And, please, no DTP wars! I wasn't slamming PageMaker ... really!

No problem. I did miss the original figures. And given that PageMaker and
FrameMaker both come from Adobe, it seems natural that simple product
differentiation requirements would prevent these two products from being
ideal for all the same documentation needs.

However...I responded to Paul after ignoring the last couple of times I saw
PageMaker being dissed as a DTP tool. It is true that PageMaker 5 lacked a
number of features essential to doing real user documentation. But PageMaker
6, as I said, appears to me to be a real tool. But I'll concede it's not
"the" tool for 100,000 pages.

Beth Mazur
MAYA Design Group
mazur -at- maya -dot- com

TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
Search the archives at or search and
browse the archives at

Previous by Author: Re: Documentation Group needs advice!
Next by Author: Re: Bullets
Previous by Thread: Re: Documentation Group needs advice!
Next by Thread: Documentation Group needs advice!

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads