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: Hard Copy Manuals: Who does layout? From:"Ivie, Guy" <GuyI -at- CORPMAIL -dot- FOLLETT -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 11 Jun 1997 11:37:00 PDT
Kathleen,
Generally speaking, I don't find PageMaker to be a good tool for manuals
of any length, particularly if they will be updated on a regular basis.
For the last (harrumph!) number of years, I've used Word exclusively for
manuals. All the documents are based on templates that were designed by
me or by a graphic artist. I took the designs and created the actual Word
templates. The rest of the writers use the template and its associated
styles to turn out documents without worrying about page layout.
If you're working with exceptionally long documents, you may find that
FrameMaker suits your needs better than Word. Most people on this list
seem to be Frame mavens; I haven't found the need for that much
horsepower yet.
Document maintenance can be a big issue in PageMaker. I'm sure someone
out there will be happy to disagree with me on this, but that's been my
experience with training manuals. I like --and use-- PM for brochures,
quick-ref cards, newsletters, magazines... anything that has a heavy mix
of objects (text or graphic) that are placed on pages in slick, varied
layouts. But for software user manuals, training manuals, etc., I find
Word documents easier to work with and easier to maintain later.
As for turning over raw text to the graphic arts dept. for production...
this is starting to sound like an author dealing with a publishing
company, not a technical documentation project. Your points are right on
target. If the company wants a unified look, let the graphics dept.
design it for you. Reproduce that look in a template for whatever tool
you use. Then keep the documents coming off your desk as finished
products. The "look" will be right, but you'll still have the freedom to
make last minute changes with a minimum of fuss and review time.
My opinions... your mileage may vary.
Guy Ivie
givie -at- earthlink -dot- net (personal)
GuyI -at- corpmail -dot- follett -dot- com (work)
TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
