> There is the further issue that if it is done directly in Framemaker > other technical writers can work on it without destroying the layout, > which often happens with Word. An additional benefit of working directly > in Framemaker is that one can use (and keep track of!) text inset > boilerplate from a standing document maintained by someone else. Change > it once in one place and import it into as many documents (at IBM there > were 300+ documents that needed a few standing elements in the unit I > was in) as need it. In the same manner one could use conditional text so > that Model A got text that only included features related to it, but > Model A+ got the conditional text that included the extra features of > the A+ line. One document, one set of corrections for the base features, > and yet two different, if related, finished books. And books they are, > anywhere from 70 or so pages to 800+ page sleeping pills that are sent > out to printers to do runs from 25 to 25,000. They all looked the same, > they all had the same structure and layout. Plus you could send the > output directly to the web, help files, PDFs, or whatever was wanted. > > From some of the stuff I had been told about Scribus I was under the > impression it was moving in that direction. I guess I heard wrong. >
Scribus is moving in many important directions, however you still seem to forget the fact that most of us actually have some life outside of it, including working. Theres about 8 of us coding... things take time. User docs get written after an area is complete. Anyone with the right skills is welcome to offer to help. Craig
