Re: That FrameMaker / Word thang...

Subject: Re: That FrameMaker / Word thang...
From: "Lisa M. Bronson" <lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com>
To: "Spreadbury, David" <david -dot- spreadbury -at- tellabs -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 12:42:38 -0600

The link for the FrameUsers site is http://www.frameusers.com/

Archives are located at http://lists.frameusers.com/pipermail/framers/

For archives of messages prior to November 19, 2005, visit
http://lists.frameusers.com/framers/archives/0512/

The 0512 at the end of the URL is the date in YYMM format, so 0512 is
December, 2005. You can change it to view archives from other months.

Lisa B.


On 3/20/06, Spreadbury, David <david -dot- spreadbury -at- tellabs -dot- com> wrote:
> Gay,
> Log onto www.framers.com and look through the archives. These questions,
> and more, have been answered many times over up there. Plus, if you were
> to post your questions there, you will reach many FrameMaker experts,
> not to say they don't watch techwhirlers also.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: techwr-l-bounces+david -dot- spreadbury=tellabs -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+david -dot- spreadbury=tellabs -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> ] On Behalf Of Gay Alson
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2006 12:41 PM
> To: 'techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com'
> Subject: That FrameMaker / Word thang...
>
> After posting a request last week for comparison docs, I received lots
> of
> good responses. A few people requested more specificity as to context,
> so
> I'm revisiting this question to pinpoint our major concerns and rephrase
> my
> issues. We've used Word for many years but as we head toward content
> management, it may be time to change authoring tools. A current desire
> is to
> cut down on doc maintenance by enabling lengthy source documents to
> serve at
> least three separate audiences. So the issues are:
>
> How do Word and FrameMaker compare in terms of time required to do the
> following:
>
>
> * Use conditional text (or an alternative) to enable source docs
> to
> serve various audiences. (Help is not an issue.)
>
> * Handle various document types, most of which (a) contain
> numerous
> graphics and tables, (b) require the use of autonumbering and
> autobulleting
> and (c) run to several hundred pages in length.
>
> * Manage multi-file documents ("books" in FM), including (a)
> search &
> replace across multiple chapters, (b) reliability in handling page
> numbering/sections/headers & footers, and (c) solid cross-reference, TOC
> and
> index performance.
>
> I'm asking for time-focused opinions because time translates to dollars
> and
> that's what management is concerned with. For example, does one app take
> less time than the other to perform a global search & replace across
> several
> chapters? Specifics would be greatly appreciated because I'd like
> quantifiable info on time expenditures--both initially and also in terms
> of
> redoing or fixing. In your experience, which app is more efficient in
> each
> of these areas? Also, do you have any advice on little-known problems
> that
> can blind-side a tech writer? Have you created any helpful workarounds
> to
> existing problems? Do you have any tips or tricks for either app that
> increase its ease of use or reliability (both of which affect the time
> spent
> using it)?
>
> I'd like to approach this issue as a survey. If you want to contact me
> off-list, I'll compile all feedback and submit a summary to the list
> that
> may be of help to some of the rest of you.
>
> Thanks for your wisdom (and generosity in sharing it),
> Gay
>
>
>
>
> ____________________
> Gay D. Alson
> Technical Writer
> NSB Group
> galson -at- nsbgroup -dot- com <mailto:galson -at- nsbgroup -dot- com>
> www.nsbgroup.com <http://www.nsbgroup.com/>
> Tel: (514) 426-0822, ext. 2116
> ============================================================
> The information contained in this message may be privileged
> and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee
> or agent responsible for delivering this message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reproduction,
> dissemination or distribution of this communication is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please notify us immediately by replying to the message and
> deleting it from your computer. Thank you. Tellabs
> ============================================================
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word features support for every major Help
> format plus PDF, HTML and more. Flexible, precise, and efficient content
> delivery. Try it today!. http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
>
> Doc-To-Help includes a one-click RoboHelp project converter. It's that easy. Watch the demo at http://www.componentone.com/TECHWRL/DocToHelp2005
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
> or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/lisa%40techwr-l.com
>
> To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
> Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
> http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
>
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word features support for every major Help
format plus PDF, HTML and more. Flexible, precise, and efficient content
delivery. Try it today!. http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l

Doc-To-Help includes a one-click RoboHelp project converter. It's that easy. Watch the demo at http://www.componentone.com/TECHWRL/DocToHelp2005

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- infoinfocus -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40infoinfocus.com

To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.


References:
RE: That FrameMaker / Word thang...: From: Spreadbury, David

Previous by Author: ADMIN List Conduct
Next by Author: Re: DITA possible for start-up/lone writer?
Previous by Thread: RE: That FrameMaker / Word thang...
Next by Thread: RE: That FrameMaker / Word thang...


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


Sponsored Ads
http://www.techwr-l.com/archives/0603/techwhirl-0603-00621.html
www.techwr-l.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2019-51
31038
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:3WVMJGY5ZQ5R7PYWFEIHCAQPYFUSPTO3
<urn:uuid:bd24b497-ee44-4a38-bf79-884cbe11efb5>
2019-12-07T08:49:46Z
184.106.92.169
text/html
sha1:QZ2WZN2QZIN7FFZODZBFKHQ3K6CWZY2E
<urn:uuid:bdca0813-d0a2-40d2-88b0-1482ac8728a8>
http://www.techwr-l.com/archives/0603/techwhirl-0603-00621.html
response
<urn:uuid:2e91cc15-889d-4524-87c8-6521a789affd>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-51
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for December 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-207.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.16 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.1-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/