Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for
> The broader point I was commenting on is whether DITA has become so prevalent > that people who do not know about structured authoring are starting to > believe that implementing structured authoring is the same thing as > implementing DITA, since the two terms are often used interchangeably. Ah, I see. And yes, we certainly need to be careful so that people don’t conflate “structured authoring” with “DITA”. I purposely used the slash construct, “structured/DITA” precisely because I wanted to address both “structured authoring, regardless of the tool” and “DITA”. But I agree that, unfortunately, this construct makes them seem interchangeable. I’ll have to think how to reword the title. If I drop either one, I might lose people who are thinking about the one that I dropped (for example, dropping “DITA” and saying just, “structured authoring”), and who don’t realize that the presentation is applicable to them even though it uses the other term. Which could happen if they’ve conflated the terms. So I’ll need to think how to re-title it, and am glad for this discussion that brought the issue to the forefront! -Monique ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com
Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for
Well, what I was trying to say is that it's relatively easy to implement literal structured authoring in FrameMaker. Once you figure out the mechanics of writing an EDD, it's pretty easy to create a simple structure that formalizes the rules that you have already been applying mentally in the unstructured world, and that can make the authoring process a whole lot easier. The broader point I was commenting on is whether DITA has become so prevalent that people who do not know about structured authoring are starting to believe that implementing structured authoring is the same thing as implementing DITA, since the two terms are often used interchangeably. I thought your presentation was good the way it was. I wasn't trying to imply that you should change anything. Gary From: Monique Semp Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 3:39:02 PM To: Etzel, Gary; framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for > when we use the term "structure/DITA", don't we give the impression that > structured authoring is DITA? That you can't have one without the other? > And that's just not true. My experience is that you can easily (well, > relatively easily) implement structured authoring in a tool like > FrameMaker, without the overhead of a full-blown DITA implementation. Yes!! That is exactly what my presentation is about: how to implement/adopt some of the good things from structured authoring "and/or" DITA when you're using other (unstructured) tools. So perhaps a different title would better convey the focus of the presentation? -Monique ** This e-mail and any attachments thereto may contain confidential information and/or information protected by intellectual property rights for the exclusive attention of the intended addressees named above. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message and its attachments. Unauthorized use, copying or further full or partial distribution of this e-mail or its contents is prohibited. ** ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com
Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for
when we use the term "structure/DITA", don't we give the impression that structured authoring is DITA? That you can't have one without the other? And that's just not true. My experience is that you can easily (well, relatively easily) implement structured authoring in a tool like FrameMaker, without the overhead of a full-blown DITA implementation. Yes!! That is exactly what my presentation is about: how to implement/adopt some of the good things from structured authoring "and/or" DITA when you're using other (unstructured) tools. So perhaps a different title would better convey the focus of the presentation? -Monique ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com
Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for
Actually ...I see it opposite from you. Structure/DITA to me notes the DITA version and if it was another, say, Structure/SGML as another kind. John X Posada AVP | Global Risk Analytics | HSBC North America Holdings Inc 330 Madison Ave., NY NY __ Phone Int: 212-525-5483 Ext: 732-259-2874 Fax Conference Bridge - 877-304-0052, Code 74809254 Email john.x.pos...@us.hsbc.com __ Protect our environment - please only print this if you have to! From: "Etzel, Gary" To: Monique Semp , "framers@lists.frameusers.com" Date: 08/11/2016 01:04 PM Subject: Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for Sent by:"Framers" My question is not directed at you specifically, Monique, but I'm curious about how the term "structure/DITA" came into play, as if they are interchangeable and mean the same thing. I am seeing this used more and more in presentations and online, and it really gets under my skin. DITA is one implementation of structured authoring, just like "Kleenex" is one implementation of a "tissue". Sure, I understand the need in some industries to have an authoring standard so that information can be exchanged and whatnot. But when we use the term "structure/DITA", don't we give the impression that structured authoring is DITA? That you can't have one without the other? And that's just not true. My experience is that you can easily (well, relatively easily) implement structured authoring in a tool like FrameMaker, without the overhead of a full-blown DITA implementation. I'd love to hear some opinions on that. -Original Message- From: Framers [mailto:framers-bounces +gary.etzel=dnvgl@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Monique Semp Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:52 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for > I'll be presenting nuts-and-bolts examples of how to do a bunch of "structured/DITA things" in Word, FrameMaker, Doxygen/Javadoc, and MadCap Flare... I gave this presentation to the STC-Berkeley chapter last night, and per several requests from this list, am sharing the slide deck. You can find it on SlideShare: http://www.slideshare.net/msemp/adopting-structuredanddita-best-practices-for-any-toolset?qid=38e06f93-0828-471c-a39b-54267a5660d4&v=&b=&from_search=1 , and on my LinkedIn profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/moniquesemp (for now in the Summary section, and after “a while” in the experience entry for Society for Technical Communication). I’d certainly welcome comment and discussion, -Monique ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com ** This e-mail and any attachments thereto may contain confidential information and/or information protected by intellectual property rights for the exclusive attention of the intended addressees named above. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message and its attachments. Unauthorized use, copying or further full or partial distribution of this e-mail or its contents is prohibited. ** ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to
Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for
Thanks, Monique! I will definitely take a look at this. Pat Christenson -Original Message- From: Framers [mailto:framers-bounces+pat.christenson=morningstar@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Monique Semp Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 10:52 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for > I'll be presenting nuts-and-bolts examples of how to do a bunch of > "structured/DITA things" in Word, FrameMaker, Doxygen/Javadoc, and MadCap > Flare... I gave this presentation to the STC-Berkeley chapter last night, and per several requests from this list, am sharing the slide deck. You can find it on SlideShare: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.slideshare.net_msemp_adopting-2Dstructuredanddita-2Dbest-2Dpractices-2Dfor-2Dany-2Dtoolset-3Fqid-3D38e06f93-2D0828-2D471c-2Da39b-2D54267a5660d4-26v-3D-26b-3D-26from-5Fsearch-3D1&d=DQIGaQ&c=qrd1rYdJNb4QhfvJv5PebOPglYwfSMJ71NR_1HMKptQ&r=XCAkAkKD_C5LA8IHfBffTgJF3-vQqo8LO_6iaUj61_E&m=kNNB0llCcx1uzCBmLHjWHZcq_fw0n4Ir6VZIxY8f2S4&s=axt_2iE1Tqn32mHcGiUjbpm7s4C8lAHjNgrMTyHDhQk&e= , and on my LinkedIn profile: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_moniquesemp&d=DQIGaQ&c=qrd1rYdJNb4QhfvJv5PebOPglYwfSMJ71NR_1HMKptQ&r=XCAkAkKD_C5LA8IHfBffTgJF3-vQqo8LO_6iaUj61_E&m=kNNB0llCcx1uzCBmLHjWHZcq_fw0n4Ir6VZIxY8f2S4&s=pco8L4A7Ntq0fR7l2Y1Qno990kRRdM6yGGrm-0zYCbM&e= (for now in the Summary section, and after “a while” in the experience entry for Society for Technical Communication). I’d certainly welcome comment and discussion, -Monique ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.frameusers.com&d=DQIGaQ&c=qrd1rYdJNb4QhfvJv5PebOPglYwfSMJ71NR_1HMKptQ&r=XCAkAkKD_C5LA8IHfBffTgJF3-vQqo8LO_6iaUj61_E&m=kNNB0llCcx1uzCBmLHjWHZcq_fw0n4Ir6VZIxY8f2S4&s=7maNpTIi0vU5HaYOtLWityCicEMjIeazTXk0SdKLkz4&e= Archives located at https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.mail-2Darchive.com_framers-2540lists.frameusers.com_&d=DQIGaQ&c=qrd1rYdJNb4QhfvJv5PebOPglYwfSMJ71NR_1HMKptQ&r=XCAkAkKD_C5LA8IHfBffTgJF3-vQqo8LO_6iaUj61_E&m=kNNB0llCcx1uzCBmLHjWHZcq_fw0n4Ir6VZIxY8f2S4&s=d8mBQzEw4YRABrs9ouQ3QOpp-EmwW201u9Y5TufsoKo&e= Subscribe and unsubscribe at https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.frameusers.com_listinfo.cgi_framers-2Dframeusers.com&d=DQIGaQ&c=qrd1rYdJNb4QhfvJv5PebOPglYwfSMJ71NR_1HMKptQ&r=XCAkAkKD_C5LA8IHfBffTgJF3-vQqo8LO_6iaUj61_E&m=kNNB0llCcx1uzCBmLHjWHZcq_fw0n4Ir6VZIxY8f2S4&s=KfMK6_akfcAzRvuDGaCVw9AlRGT9nb4P_GfwBxgY-LY&e= Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com
Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for
My question is not directed at you specifically, Monique, but I'm curious about how the term "structure/DITA" came into play, as if they are interchangeable and mean the same thing. I am seeing this used more and more in presentations and online, and it really gets under my skin. DITA is one implementation of structured authoring, just like "Kleenex" is one implementation of a "tissue". Sure, I understand the need in some industries to have an authoring standard so that information can be exchanged and whatnot. But when we use the term "structure/DITA", don't we give the impression that structured authoring is DITA? That you can't have one without the other? And that's just not true. My experience is that you can easily (well, relatively easily) implement structured authoring in a tool like FrameMaker, without the overhead of a full-blown DITA implementation. I'd love to hear some opinions on that. -Original Message- From: Framers [mailto:framers-bounces+gary.etzel=dnvgl@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Monique Semp Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2016 11:52 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for > I'll be presenting nuts-and-bolts examples of how to do a bunch of > "structured/DITA things" in Word, FrameMaker, Doxygen/Javadoc, and MadCap > Flare... I gave this presentation to the STC-Berkeley chapter last night, and per several requests from this list, am sharing the slide deck. You can find it on SlideShare: http://www.slideshare.net/msemp/adopting-structuredanddita-best-practices-for-any-toolset?qid=38e06f93-0828-471c-a39b-54267a5660d4&v=&b=&from_search=1, and on my LinkedIn profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/moniquesemp (for now in the Summary section, and after “a while” in the experience entry for Society for Technical Communication). I’d certainly welcome comment and discussion, -Monique ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com ** This e-mail and any attachments thereto may contain confidential information and/or information protected by intellectual property rights for the exclusive attention of the intended addressees named above. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message and its attachments. Unauthorized use, copying or further full or partial distribution of this e-mail or its contents is prohibited. ** ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com
Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for
You should post the link to that presentation on techwr-l as well. ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com
Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for
> I'll be presenting nuts-and-bolts examples of how to do a bunch of > "structured/DITA things" in Word, FrameMaker, Doxygen/Javadoc, and MadCap > Flare... I gave this presentation to the STC-Berkeley chapter last night, and per several requests from this list, am sharing the slide deck. You can find it on SlideShare: http://www.slideshare.net/msemp/adopting-structuredanddita-best-practices-for-any-toolset?qid=38e06f93-0828-471c-a39b-54267a5660d4&v=&b=&from_search=1, and on my LinkedIn profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/moniquesemp (for now in the Summary section, and after “a while” in the experience entry for Society for Technical Communication). I’d certainly welcome comment and discussion, -Monique ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com
Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for
Hi Monique - What a very interesting and helpful post. Do you plan to offer your presentation as a webex? I'd be very interesting in seeing it. I was at VMware too, as a consultant during the changeover to structure. Did our paths cross? Pat Christenson -Original Message- From: Framers [mailto:framers-bounces+pat.christenson=morningstar@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Monique Semp Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 5:20 PM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: [Framers] structured content - not always called for > But then, working with unstructured FM content in the 21st century is really > not done, if you ask me. Converting is fairly easy - we do it all the time - > so if you do not have structured content yet, look in that direction for your > best practices. Oh, I disagree strongly with this. Working with unstructured content is done often, although I'll grant you with varying degrees of success :-). I've worked with DITA—including at VMware, where I got to work directly with some of the thought leaders in structured content—and definitely see the great advantages **but only if appropriate **. In my current assignment, I'm the sole writer (and part-time at that), for an organization that doesn't have very many products, that has no need for localization, and that has independent streams for Marketing and Tech Pubs deliverables (and no need to combine them or share actual content files). I've worked on-and-off at this company for 10+ years, and it's only now that I'm even looking into any sort of "reuse strategy". And truthfully, if I hadn't recently spent several years in a heavily structured-content environment, I doubt I'd have even thought of it. It's not too much content that I can't just copy/paste, make a few notes in the wiki about "if you change this in doc A, be sure to make the parallel change in doc B", and be done with it. But being a trainable monkey (as "they" say), I figured the docs (and I) would benefit from a bit of forethought. I've seen conversions done, and yes, they're fairly easy. But there's no need to invest the time to migrate content, possibly purchase additional tools (at my own expense because I'm a consultant, not a direct employee), or develop new templates for publishing from structured FrameMaker. As well, doing so would make it even harder for my client to bring in another tech writer who's appropriately skilled in the tools with which I've created their docs, and experienced enough to figure things out (given the lack of detail in the Tech Pubs Processes and Procedures, which are lacking detail because there's no need for the client to pay for more detailed versions). I'm not anti-DITA, anti-structure, or anything like that. In fact, I took a recent 18-month contract in large part because I'd get to keep working in the structured content world. In addition to the oft-cited benefits (reuse, localization, topic-based writing, semantic-styling), I found that I could write much more accurate content, much more quickly than otherwise. And when reviewers focused on minutia such as an occasional bad break in a PDF, I could just say, "sorry, nothing I can do about it" :-). But structured authoring/DITA, is simply overkill for many situations, and is typically best with *at least* one "pubs tools guy/gal" in addition to the dedicated writers. I feel strongly about this, and in fact am developing a presentation along the lines of "Adopting the Best Practices of Structured Authoring—In Any Toolset". I'll be presenting nuts-and-bolts examples of how to do a bunch of "structured/DITA things" in Word, FrameMaker, Doxygen/Javadoc, and MadCap Flare. Word-for-word, this is how I pitched the presentation topic, which was very well received by the STC-Berkeley programs team: -- All too often the “experts” seem to imply that you must use some giant system with lots of overhead (I’m thinking DITA at VMware or Salesforce, of the big Ponydocs ecosystem at Splunk) in order to get any of the benefits of structured/DITA writing. But that’s just not true. There are lots of things that are about writing technique and simple style management in whatever tool you’re using. But nobody presents it that way. They just shake their heads at the practicalities of needing to use cheap/free tools at a shop that’s not interested in investing in tools for writers. And I’d like to show that this needn’t prevent writers from gaining the benefits of structure and style that DITA enforces. -- Just some long rambling thoughts for consideration, -Monique ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's ho
Re: [Framers] structured content - not always called for
Good points Monique. I'm in a similar situation, being a lone writer, and not having the time or resources to implement a structured workflow. I deal with two main streams of documentation. For my operations guides and online help I use FrameMaker and WebWorks ePublisher. There's little reuse involved and I can use text insets to manage that. For our last major platform upgrade, I did a content analysis using DITA's concept/task/reference model to restructure the documentation and got good comments on the approach. The other stream involves many technical specifications which go out to our clients. For these, I have to use Word. I've found that Thirty Six Software's SmartDocs tool gives me most of the benefits I'd get from moving to DITA and is much easier to set up and use. Yes, if I had a group of four or five writers, I'd probably move to DITA, but that's not going to happen. Regards Keith -- Keith Soltys Senior Technical Writer Architecture TMX Group (416) 947-4397 http://www.tmx.com/ -Original Message- From: Framers [mailto:framers-bounces+keith.soltys=tmx@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Monique Semp Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 6:20 PM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: [Framers] structured content - not always called for > But then, working with unstructured FM content in the 21st century is really > not done, if you ask me. Converting is fairly easy - we do it all the time - > so if you do not have structured content yet, look in that direction for your > best practices. Oh, I disagree strongly with this. Working with unstructured content is done often, although I'll grant you with varying degrees of success :-). I've worked with DITA—including at VMware, where I got to work directly with some of the thought leaders in structured content—and definitely see the great advantages **but only if appropriate **. In my current assignment, I'm the sole writer (and part-time at that), for an organization that doesn't have very many products, that has no need for localization, and that has independent streams for Marketing and Tech Pubs deliverables (and no need to combine them or share actual content files). I've worked on-and-off at this company for 10+ years, and it's only now that I'm even looking into any sort of "reuse strategy". And truthfully, if I hadn't recently spent several years in a heavily structured-content environment, I doubt I'd have even thought of it. It's not too much content that I can't just copy/paste, make a few notes in the wiki about "if you change this in doc A, be sure to make the parallel change in doc B", and be done with it. But being a trainable monkey (as "they" say), I figured the docs (and I) would benefit from a bit of forethought. I've seen conversions done, and yes, they're fairly easy. But there's no need to invest the time to migrate content, possibly purchase additional tools (at my own expense because I'm a consultant, not a direct employee), or develop new templates for publishing from structured FrameMaker. As well, doing so would make it even harder for my client to bring in another tech writer who's appropriately skilled in the tools with which I've created their docs, and experienced enough to figure things out (given the lack of detail in the Tech Pubs Processes and Procedures, which are lacking detail because there's no need for the client to pay for more detailed versions). I'm not anti-DITA, anti-structure, or anything like that. In fact, I took a recent 18-month contract in large part because I'd get to keep working in the structured content world. In addition to the oft-cited benefits (reuse, localization, topic-based writing, semantic-styling), I found that I could write much more accurate content, much more quickly than otherwise. And when reviewers focused on minutia such as an occasional bad break in a PDF, I could just say, "sorry, nothing I can do about it" :-). But structured authoring/DITA, is simply overkill for many situations, and is typically best with *at least* one "pubs tools guy/gal" in addition to the dedicated writers. I feel strongly about this, and in fact am developing a presentation along the lines of "Adopting the Best Practices of Structured Authoring—In Any Toolset". I'll be presenting nuts-and-bolts examples of how to do a bunch of "structured/DITA things" in Word, FrameMaker, Doxygen/Javadoc, and MadCap Flare. Word-for-word, this is how I pitched the presentation topic, which was very well received by the STC-Berkeley programs team: -- All too often the “experts” seem to imply that you must use some giant system with lots of overhead (I’m thinking DITA at VMware or Salesforce, of the big Ponydocs ecosyst
[Framers] structured content - not always called for
> But then, working with unstructured FM content in the 21st century is really > not done, if you ask me. Converting is fairly easy - we do it all the time - > so if you do not have structured content yet, look in that direction for your > best practices. Oh, I disagree strongly with this. Working with unstructured content is done often, although I'll grant you with varying degrees of success :-). I've worked with DITA—including at VMware, where I got to work directly with some of the thought leaders in structured content—and definitely see the great advantages **but only if appropriate **. In my current assignment, I'm the sole writer (and part-time at that), for an organization that doesn't have very many products, that has no need for localization, and that has independent streams for Marketing and Tech Pubs deliverables (and no need to combine them or share actual content files). I've worked on-and-off at this company for 10+ years, and it's only now that I'm even looking into any sort of "reuse strategy". And truthfully, if I hadn't recently spent several years in a heavily structured-content environment, I doubt I'd have even thought of it. It's not too much content that I can't just copy/paste, make a few notes in the wiki about "if you change this in doc A, be sure to make the parallel change in doc B", and be done with it. But being a trainable monkey (as "they" say), I figured the docs (and I) would benefit from a bit of forethought. I've seen conversions done, and yes, they're fairly easy. But there's no need to invest the time to migrate content, possibly purchase additional tools (at my own expense because I'm a consultant, not a direct employee), or develop new templates for publishing from structured FrameMaker. As well, doing so would make it even harder for my client to bring in another tech writer who's appropriately skilled in the tools with which I've created their docs, and experienced enough to figure things out (given the lack of detail in the Tech Pubs Processes and Procedures, which are lacking detail because there's no need for the client to pay for more detailed versions). I'm not anti-DITA, anti-structure, or anything like that. In fact, I took a recent 18-month contract in large part because I'd get to keep working in the structured content world. In addition to the oft-cited benefits (reuse, localization, topic-based writing, semantic-styling), I found that I could write much more accurate content, much more quickly than otherwise. And when reviewers focused on minutia such as an occasional bad break in a PDF, I could just say, "sorry, nothing I can do about it" :-). But structured authoring/DITA, is simply overkill for many situations, and is typically best with *at least* one "pubs tools guy/gal" in addition to the dedicated writers. I feel strongly about this, and in fact am developing a presentation along the lines of "Adopting the Best Practices of Structured Authoring—In Any Toolset". I'll be presenting nuts-and-bolts examples of how to do a bunch of "structured/DITA things" in Word, FrameMaker, Doxygen/Javadoc, and MadCap Flare. Word-for-word, this is how I pitched the presentation topic, which was very well received by the STC-Berkeley programs team: -- All too often the “experts” seem to imply that you must use some giant system with lots of overhead (I’m thinking DITA at VMware or Salesforce, of the big Ponydocs ecosystem at Splunk) in order to get any of the benefits of structured/DITA writing. But that’s just not true. There are lots of things that are about writing technique and simple style management in whatever tool you’re using. But nobody presents it that way. They just shake their heads at the practicalities of needing to use cheap/free tools at a shop that’s not interested in investing in tools for writers. And I’d like to show that this needn’t prevent writers from gaining the benefits of structure and style that DITA enforces. -- Just some long rambling thoughts for consideration, -Monique ___ This message is from the Framers mailing list Send messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com Visit the list's homepage at http://www.frameusers.com Archives located at http://www.mail-archive.com/framers%40lists.frameusers.com/ Subscribe and unsubscribe at http://lists.frameusers.com/listinfo.cgi/framers-frameusers.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com
