And unless you're very clever, it's easy to paint yourself into a corner with an in-house system. It might be "simple" to develop something for what your needs are now, but you neglect to make it open-ended or scalable for whatever changes you need to make in the future.
And then there's portability... Nadine >________________________________ > From: Alan Houser <[email protected]> >To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >Sent: Monday, July 8, 2013 6:50:36 PM >Subject: Re: DITA/docbook vs your own schema > > > >I gotta generally agree with Matt. Occasionally I run into an information >modeling project that I can knock off in an afternoon, but that's pretty rare. >Remember that you will not only need to model "block" content (topics, >headings, paragraphs, lists, etc.), but also tables, cross-references, images, >etc. The latter set can be a bit tricky. Plus, oh, your metadata. > >With DITA or DocBook, you also get a publishing framework. Also usually non-trivial to create from scratch, especially if you are publishing to multiple output formats, using filtering, content re-use, etc. > >I'll mention with some regret that FrameMaker's DocBook support is pretty poor. I've never figured out why...the "typical" use cases for both (books, PDF) line up very well. It may be a chicken-and-egg issue...I suspect more people would use DocBook if FrameMaker provided better DocBook support. > >-Alan > >On 7/8/13 6:31 PM, Matt Sullivan wrote: > >A list of what you'll save using DITA or DocBook rather than creating your own >schema: >> 1. Time >> 2. Money >> >> >>(Hey, someone had to say it…) >> >>-Matt _______________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to framers as [email protected]. Send list messages to [email protected]. To unsubscribe send a blank email to [email protected] or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to [email protected]. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
