Re: Structured FrameMaker and Unstructured FrameMaker

Subject: Re: Structured FrameMaker and Unstructured FrameMaker
From: Chris Despopoulos <despopoulos_chriss -at- yahoo -dot- com>
To: "techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 01:01:14 -0700 (PDT)

Sadly, there's a level at which specific instructions can't be given.  The actual steps depend entirely on your target EDD, the current template you're using, and how well the template was adhered to.  I guess there are a few pointers, though.

First, there should be no difference between generating structure in 7.0 vs 10 or 11.  The ideas are the same.  So if you're discovering problems with an old work flow, then you should look for what has changed in your legacy docs, or your EDD.

Second, start with a really small document that only has one part of the structure.  Maybe start with a H1 and a body paragraph.  Get that to generate the correct structure.  Then add something else...  Build it up incrementally until you have a full document working.  Save tables for last.  It's very difficult to start with a complete table that doesn't work and figure out where the problem is.  It's much easier to build up from a small table that works.  So I'm suggesting you start a new conversion table, and work up to a full solution from there. 

The Adobe docs do tell you how to nest elements.  You'll need to understand that.  Also, use labels to identify pieces for more conditional effects when wrapping things up.  All that should be in the docs.

You may never get 100% satisfaction in every case.  You'll have to check your work anyway.  So if you have to manually fix a thing or two, so be it.  Think of the 80/20 rule...  80% of the process can be implemented with 20% of the effort.  Then implementing that last 20% of the process will consume 80% of the effort.  Unless you plan to sell a product, somewhere after 80% and before 100% you'll find a threshold of diminishing returns.  Cash in your chips and be happy.  

Hope this helps...          cud


Message: 1
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 19:10:38 -0700
From: Maxwell Hoffmann <mhoffman -at- adobe -dot- com>
To: William Sherman <bsherman77 -at- embarqmail -dot- com>
Cc: "techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Subject: Re: Structured FrameMaker and Unstructured FrameMaker
Message-ID: <CFC20437-50B4-4A6E-AF7E-7E614F4A50F6 -at- adobe -dot- com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


I am restoring a 7-part recorded Webinar series on structured FrameMaker that was done by Tom Aldous with FM10. Watch for an announcement with the link posted to this group sometime tomorrow. You will find this series very useful.

Maxwell Hoffmann |  Product  Evangelist  |  Adobe  |  p. 503.336.5952  |  c. 503.805.3719  |  mhoffman -at- adobe -dot- com ; &
Upcoming webinar calendar:

On Jun 4, 2013, at 7:04 PM, "William Sherman" <bsherman77 -at- embarqmail -dot- com> wrote:

> I know many of you have gone on to better things, but I'm working with Frame again and ran into an issue.
> The last structured FrameMaker was mostly all structured documents in FrameMaker 7.2. Six years ago, I was someplace that was converting from unstructured to structured in 7.0, I think. I don't remember an issue trying to convert unstructured files to structured ones.
> However, in FrameMaker 10, we are having issues getting unstructured documents to convert to structured. We already have an EDD. We have gone through and created the conversion rules table and adapted it to our EDD and structure.
> Yet when we convert documents, the structured view frequently has element names that are not valid in our structure (the table should handle that) and are usually not in a staggered outline but a single line and red.
> Granted, a couple of us have only put in a couple of days to do this, but IMVHO, this is the sort of thing that should be very much automated and has instead been very manual for us.
> And still no good results.
> The Adobe instructions we have found lack several steps. We have managed to figure those out and fill them in. Most sites in Internet searches pop up regurgitated Adobe instructions. No one so far seems to answer why we haven't ended up with a final structured document that doesn't require 8 hours of massaging to be like our other structured docs.
> Anyone have a nice set of instructions that really work?
> Thanks.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for authoring.

Learn more:


You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @

Previous by Author: Re: Use of plug-in/unplug
Next by Author: Mktg materials and PMS specs - Int'l
Previous by Thread: Re: Structured FrameMaker and Unstructured FrameMaker
Next by Thread: TechWhirl: Technical Communication Recap for June 7, 2013

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

Sponsored Ads