Framemaker and RoboHelp

[Jim Barrow]

Peter Neilson wrote:

>Jim Barrow asks about the soundness of the opposing views that (a) >Robohelp alone can create print and on-line docs and (b) that one >should use Frame for print and RH for online.

That's it in a nutshell.  The needs are these:

1. Produce an end-user manual that "looks" good.  That is, the VP in charge of deployment/training wants to hand over a manual that looks professional.  He wants it nicely bound with a eye-catching front cover and eye-pleasing headers/footers/graphics/layout throughout the book.

2. Online help.

>What goals are appropriate? Here are some:
>
> - Fits all the needs.

I'm with you so far.  Time is critical here and the VP needs to make sure that we produce stellar material, basically so that he keeps his job.

> - Customers cheer--it matches their previously unknown desires.

This is where my wiki post comes in.  The VP wanted ~3000 end-users to edit the user manual as we finished chapters.

> - First to market.

This is the driving force behind the entire project.

> - Ahead of the curve all the way.
>
>What facts do the purveyors of theories (a) and (b) bring to the >argument pit that will help meet those goals or ones like them? 

The question comes down to this:  Can RoboHelp produce an end-user manual that is as good as one produced in Framemaker?

'They' say that we must create the help text in Frame first (to utilize Frame's better tools), then import that into RH for the online help.

This makes no sense to me.  If they want us to use Frame, then we might as well use it to generate the online help as well, right?

- Jim