Re: FrameMaker vs. Interleaf

Subject: Re: FrameMaker vs. Interleaf
From: Sarah Carroll <sarahc -at- INDIGO -dot- IE>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 16:50:53 +0000

Chris et al,
Krista made the most valid point regarding Chris's dilemma -
the process the company is using is archaic, and that is
what needs to be addressed.

The question as to whether Interleaf or FrameMaker should
be used by the writers comes down to personal choice.
I prefer FrameMaker's cross-referencing features, but much
prefer Interleaf's indexing features. I hate Interleaf's way of
using sub-components for character styles, but really like
the sub-component concept when it comes to building
glossary type lists. I love the way you can select all components
of a particular type in Interleaf to make changes, but like
Frame's master page feature. Dislike Interleaf's inflexibility
when it comes to page layout and frames, much prefer
Frame's table facilities. Just a snippet of my personal
likes and dislikes with the two packages.

Richard Frederick made valid points about Interleaf's future,
but I wouldn't bury them yet. There are many massive Interleaf
installations out there, with substantial investment in the
software and (particularly) in training. One point Richard made
caught my eye in particular:

>We do a lot of translation here and the SGML will be a tremendous help and
>decrease our overhead.

I really wouldn't count on it! Translating SGML can be almost as
tricky a business as translating Interleaf files used to be. Take a look
at The S-Tagger for Interleaf at http://www.trados.com for help with
reducing the overhead.

Best
Sarah
sarahc -at- indigo -dot- ie




Previous by Author: Re: Reality? Was: HTML vs PDF
Next by Author: ANNOUNCE: FrameMaker training in North Carolina
Previous by Thread: Re: FrameMaker vs. Interleaf
Next by Thread: Framemaker vs. Interleaf


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads