TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: The case against M$ Word From:"Chris Morton" <salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com> To:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com Date:Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:22:15 -0700
OK, look. No one answered my original question regarding the thread I'm
seeking. I'm not looking for a debate here, rather info about a thread to
which I contributed and followed.
I have laid out many a software manual in my time, thanks, and I'm not
wanting to argue with any of you about it being a whale of lot easier using
a *real* page layout tool. (My personal preference is PageMaker, simply
because I've used it since its very first iteration and know it intimately.
But I'm also experienced with FrameMaker and understand its place.)
As for Word, I've inherited a manual, begun by our SW and HW engineers, that
would take a while to correctly recompose. If I'm going to invest time
recomposing the thing, then, why not do so using a *layout tool* that
provides the features to which I'm accustomed?
As for the current mess, every time I want to add or insert something, all
of my prior graphics work needs to be continually tweaked. Yesterday a
subhead mysteriously disappeared all on its own. Had I built these DOCs from
scratch, things may have been different, but my own experience says that
Word cannot handle the sort of sophisticated graphics placement/manipulation
(including overlays) that I'm wanting to use. Further, someone please tell
me about Word's preflight ability when compared to any of the Adobe
products.
Now...does anyone remember that thread? I believe the OP of it was a newbie
inquiring about tools we use, and it was started perhaps the week before
last. I'm simply looking for some keywords I can use to pull it up in my
Gmail archive.
Thanks
> Chris
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Chris Morton <salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com> wrote:
> I'm preparing an executive summary as to why M$ Word is not an adequate
> tool for software manual production and why Adobe InDesign is a superior
> choice for the task at hand. (FrameMaker is more than this company needs.)
>
> Just a few weeks ago I participated in a thread whereby a techwr-l newbie
> inquired about the tools of the trade. In that thread, there were many
> reasons given why Word is insufficient. Can someone please point me to that
> thread, or others that support my view?
>
> Thanks
>
> > Chris
>
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ComponentOne Doc-To-Help 2009 is your all-in-one authoring and publishing
solution. Author in Doc-To-Help's XML-based editor, Microsoft Word or
HTML and publish to the Web, Help systems or printed manuals. http://www.doctohelp.com
Help & Manual 5: The complete help authoring tool for individual
authors and teams. Professional power, intuitive interface. Write
once, publish to 8 formats. Multi-user authoring and version control! http://www.helpandmanual.com/
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
