Re: PageMaker? what to do

[Kris Olberg <KJOlberg -at- AOL -dot- COM>]

In a message dated 95-11-02 17:49:05 EST, 71601 -dot- 1266 -at- COMPUSERVE -dot- COM (Peter
Kent) writes:


> A good client is one who pays on time and doesn't hassle you. They have the
>right to say what program you will use. In most cases they have good reason
>to
>define what you will work with--because the rest of the company is using
that
>program, for instance. They may have chosen the wrong program to standardize
>with (many companies are using desktop-publishign programs when they should
>be
>using word processors), but having made that decision it makes sense to get
>their contractors to fall in line, too.

You're right about a good client paying on time, and they do have the right
to say what program you use. My post was short and pointed because I get
irritated when our profession is reduced to page layout, design, and desktop
publishing. I am a writer, not a desktop publisher. I think it's bad for our
profession to focus so deeply on DTP. Witness the following numbers, which
reflect how many posts I have saved on several TECHWR-L topics:

112 posts on tools and graphics issues
35 posts on copyrights/trademarks
22 posts on Web issues (long v. short, etc.)
17 on word, verb, and pronoun usage
11 on indexing issues
6 on optimal document size
etc.

Do these numbers accurately reflect that writers spend too much time focusing
on DTP issues and not enough on the writing? I think so.

I suppose the issue is that many clients don't have the resources to supply a
desktop publishing resource to supplement the process. They could be
educated. We need to continue to educate them. And when a cost/benefit
analysis shows (which will not be the case for all clients) the cost savings
rendered by allowing the writer to focusing on the writing, not the DTP, the
writer should be allowed to use software of choice.

Regards...Kris