You wrote:

>>The PDF "e-book" that comes with Microsoft Manual of Style, 3rd
>>edition, is this month's guest at the Hmmm... corner at
>>Authored with FrameMaker 7.0, this PDF has a total of ... one link
>>(which happens to be a bad link), see
>You certainly have a point there, Shlomo, but the PDF version is a
>godsend to Mac and UNIX users. In fact, I'm out of the office traveling
>in Japan right now and was able to look something up about check boxes
>thanks to the PDF.
>Personally, I've always preferred Apple's Publications Style Guide but
>follow the MS way if I believe the consistency will help users.
>Apple updated its guide in January.
>Incidentally, my mate Bruce insists that "Microsoft Manual of Style" is
>an oxymoron ;-)

I don't have a problem with using a cross-platform PDF as opposed to a 
Windows-specific CHM (available previously for the Microsoft Manual of 
Style).  And I definitely prefer having a "zero-links PDF" than not having 
one at all.

I strongly disagree with the approach that effectively says "we'll just 
save the manual as PDF and thus we'll have an e-book ready for shipping... 
linking is nice to have, but perhaps in a future version".

I had a brief look in the updated Apple style guide. From the linking point 
of view, it is in the same class as the Microsoft guide. What could be more 
basic in such an "e-book" reference than to have the entries following 
"See" and "See slso" properly linked to the target (rather than force you 
to locate that target yourself)?

Unfortunately, the "standard" set by the PDFs offered from many major 
companies [Adobe included; several entries in the Hmmm corner point to 
several PDFs provided with FM/Acrobat products] propagates in all 
directions: "if this is good enough for <<name>>, then why couldn't it be 
good enough for us"?

Shlomo Perets

Training, consulting & add-ons: FrameMaker, Structured FM and Acrobat

Reply via email to