Re: XML-based Help Authoring tools for customized help

Subject: Re: XML-based Help Authoring tools for customized help
From: eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:33:50 -0500


"Sean Wheller" <seanwhe -at- hotmail -dot- com> wrote on 12/15/2003 01:52:49 PM:
> On numerous occasions I have stated that Frame is a very
> powerful tool, but
> that *I* don't see the point of using a DTP package for
> authoring in an XML based publishing environment.


> No body is trying to put down anyone. However, whenever a
> person suggests an
> alternative that may hint at taking any functional task
> away from a tool
> like frame or word, its users raise the flag and blow the
> battle cry.

But no alternative has been suggested. Except perhaps notepad, and Goober did
suggest XMLSpy, but the discussion quickly diverted to the arcane and pointless
distinction between data and documentation.

> The conventional tools of the trade are not redundant,
> just because of XML applications such as Docbook, TEI or DITA.

But none of these things are applications comparable to FrameMaker. You can't
download Docbook and start typing into the "Docbook application". You CAN
however download or access Docbook "applications" for FrameMaker, Epic,
Wordperfect, etc, etc. AFTER you've chosen to use Docbook, TEI, or DITA, you
have to determine which tools you are going to use and what the workflow/process
is going to be. Choosing to use a strict or loose HTML application doesn't have
any bearing (necessarily) on the tool you'll use to author and manage the
content you create.

> However, it may be worth considering that some people will actually
> change their workflow and process due to the introduction of XML
> in the publishing system.

And we are looking into alternatives. Our next generation information gathering
system will include an on-line and downloadable XML editor. But if FrameMaker is
already installed, there's no reason to dump it and you also dump a lot of
advantages that Frame has.

> There are many who will have agreed with the Epic
> salesman. I don't think that makes them wrong.

I'm sorry for the language, but I'll stand by it. From the stand point of a
FrameMaker novice it may SEEM true. But IMO it's either an outright lie,
delusional, or simple ignorance to state that SGML/XML in FrameMaker is
difficult, EDDs are cryptic and overly complicated, and FrameMaker isn't SGML
native or doesn't produce PURE(tm) SGML. Saying such things DOES make the
salesmen wrong. If starting a new system, it's probably a toss up as to which is
more complicated to setup and a difficult calculation to determine ROI on either
investment. But when experience with one tool already exists in house, or part
of the system is in place, to make those claims is ABSOLUTE rubbish and the
balance very quickly (I'd say instantly) tilts in favour of the existing
knowledge base.

> For some it is perfectly natural. I find that a
> presentation layer actually
> inhibits my productivity. Simple operations become a
> concatenated list of
> mouse clicks that could have been accomplished with two or
> three keyboard
> operations. Formatting is something defined once in an XSL
> and called upon when needed.

And formatting is only defined in the EDD once and called upon when needed. Most
element functions are available through keystrokes. but we're not talking about
structure or XML/SGML are we? We're arguing tool use. I'll stop and agree to
each his own preference.

> Do you refer to everyone who is not in your camp with such
> derogatory terms?

Sorry, but too much of the language around XML is designed to make painfully
simple concepts difficult to comprehend. Just the impossibility of those in the
XML arena to consistently use the term application as a single definition is
testament to the illusionary barriers to using XML.

> I do however think thank you for the statement
> "Not to pick on Sean specifically".

Sorry, and I apologise. It's always near impossible to avoid insulting people in
e-mail. I wrote that because to that point in the thread only you had gone a
ways down the path I was arguing against. I could have been more verbose and
made it clearer that my meaning was to speak out against an extreme that hadn't
yet been fully supported on-list, but that I saw looming in the distance. So to
speak.

No hard feelings?

I do hope that the poor souls looking for insight are learning something from
this.....

Eric L. Dunn
Senior Technical Writer



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ROBOHELP FOR FRAMEMAKER TRIAL NOW AVAILABLE!

RoboHelp for FrameMaker is a NEW online publishing tool for FrameMaker that
lets you easily single-source content to online Help, intranet, and Web.
The interface is designed for FrameMaker users, so there is little or no
learning curve and no macro language required! Call 800-718-4407 for
competitive pricing or download a trial at: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l4

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.



Previous by Author: Re: XML-based Help Authoring tools for customized help
Next by Author: RE: XML-based Help Authoring tools for customized help
Previous by Thread: Re: XML-based Help Authoring tools for customized help
Next by Thread: RE: XML-based Help Authoring tools for customized help


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


Sponsored Ads