RE: Switching to Structured FrameMaker
In my experience, it is easier to teach structured FM than unstructured, because you have a clearly designed output document target for new writers to use as an example and they can't jury-rig fifteen different ways to skin the same cat. You must have good tools, EDD and templates, and must train them on how to access critical features like attributes and variables. What is VERY difficult, however, is working in a MIXED structured and unstructured environment wherein writers have to switch mental gears depending on the project. They try to use para tag methods to manipulate structured elements and all their fixes go away after the next book update and reapplication of the EDD. Where structure shines is in an environment of multiple writers and few editors where a single look-and-feel must be established and maintained across a lot of publications. In those cases, demanding that all submissions contain valid structure and then reapplying the EDD and removing all manual overrides upon submission goes a long way towards maintaining specifications and standards. Those writers who cannot or will not abide by the structure rules can be easily identified and either retrained or replaced. Structured FM is an effective truth-teller in a multiple-writer environment, provided efficient and competent tools and training have been provided. Randall C. Reed Senior Technical Writer Technical Publications Total Life Cycle Support (o) 843-574-3899 (c) 843-906-5522 -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 9:44 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Switching to Structured FrameMaker I've gotten some wonderful responses both on the list and privately. I'd begun to think that, since a lot of my clients rely on freelancers who come and go, structured FrameMaker might be the way to ensure consistency across documents. Then it occurred to me, how hard is it to get writers on board with structured documentation? If you hire a new person and they don't know structured FrameMaker, how much coaching do you have to do to get them started? And . . . does it really make the usual craziness about autonumbering and variables in headers, footers, TOCs, LOTs, LOFs, and Indexes . . GO AWAY? (I mean, in this situation: new contractor comes on board, gets new template, at some point copies text from an older doc with conflicting paragraph tags; variables and cross-references break; frustration and hair-tearing ensue.) The elimination of that struggle would be worth a lot. Thanks one and all. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as randall.r...@forceprotection.net. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/randall.reed%40force protection.net Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. This e-mail is intended solely for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain legally privileged and CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended solely for viewing by the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you should immediately stop reading this message and delete it from your system. Any review, dissemination, copying, printing or other use of this e-mail by persons or entities other than the addressee is prohibited. Please notify the Helpdesk at helpd...@forceprotection.net if you have received this message in error. This material contains confidential and proprietary information of Force Protection, Inc. and its subsidiaries. Copying this material or disclosing such information to others without the Company's prior consent is prohibited. This material also contains technical data relating to a Defense Article within the meaning of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 CFR Part 120). The transfer or disclosure of this information to any non-U.S. person or company without an export license approved by the United States Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls is prohibited under federal law. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Switching to Structured FrameMaker
In my experience, it is easier to teach structured FM than unstructured, because you have a clearly designed output document target for new writers to use as an example and they can't jury-rig fifteen different ways to skin the same cat. You must have good tools, EDD and templates, and must train them on how to access critical features like attributes and variables. What is VERY difficult, however, is working in a MIXED structured and unstructured environment wherein writers have to switch mental gears depending on the project. They try to use para tag methods to manipulate structured elements and all their "fixes" go away after the next book update and reapplication of the EDD. Where structure shines is in an environment of multiple writers and few editors where a single look-and-feel must be established and maintained across a lot of publications. In those cases, demanding that all submissions contain valid structure and then reapplying the EDD and removing all manual overrides upon submission goes a long way towards maintaining specifications and standards. Those writers who cannot or will not abide by the structure rules can be easily identified and either retrained or replaced. Structured FM is an effective truth-teller in a multiple-writer environment, provided efficient and competent tools and training have been provided. Randall C. Reed Senior Technical Writer Technical Publications Total Life Cycle Support (o) 843-574-3899 (c) 843-906-5522 -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 9:44 AM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Switching to Structured FrameMaker I've gotten some wonderful responses both on the list and privately. I'd begun to think that, since a lot of my clients rely on freelancers who come and go, structured FrameMaker might be the way to ensure consistency across documents. Then it occurred to me, how hard is it to get writers on board with structured documentation? If you hire a new person and they don't know structured FrameMaker, how much coaching do you have to do to get them started? And . . . does it really make the usual craziness about autonumbering and variables in headers, footers, TOCs, LOTs, LOFs, and Indexes . . GO AWAY? (I mean, in this situation: new contractor comes on board, gets new template, at some point copies text from an older doc with conflicting paragraph tags; variables and cross-references break; frustration and hair-tearing ensue.) The elimination of that struggle would be worth a lot. Thanks one and all. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as randall.reed at forceprotection.net. Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/randall.reed%40force protection.net Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. This e-mail is intended solely for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain legally privileged and CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended solely for viewing by the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you should immediately stop reading this message and delete it from your system. Any review, dissemination, copying, printing or other use of this e-mail by persons or entities other than the addressee is prohibited. Please notify the Helpdesk at helpdesk at forceprotection.net if you have received this message in error. This material contains confidential and proprietary information of Force Protection, Inc. and its subsidiaries. Copying this material or disclosing such information to others without the Company's prior consent is prohibited. This material also contains technical data relating to a "Defense Article" within the meaning of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 CFR Part 120). The transfer or disclosure of this information to any non-U.S. person or company without an export license approved by the United States Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls is prohibited under federal law.
Re: Switching to Structured FrameMaker
--What was your documentation situation? (How many product lines, how many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much translation?) I am a single writer documenting 8 products =~ 16 books and 10 or so online help systems, with a fair degree of text reuse, plus occasional contract manuals added in. --Why did you decide that it was time to switch to structured documentation? What kind of limit had you reached? I did it so that I could single-source my online help. I was using a dead-end HAT tool. I now use a home-grown system that wouldn't be possible without the XML output from Framemaker. --What kinds of output do you create from structured FrameMaker? books and online help --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more efficient? Has it improved the responsiveness or quality of your documentation? I couldn't do what I do without it, both in terms of my online help process and text reuse. I think that even aside from the XML/reuse issue, structured frame fosters improved document quality. To do it right, you have to get your formatting and style under control - no rogue para and char formats etc. I also rely heavily on plugins from West Street Consulting and scripts that I've written with framescript to automate and manage my doc process. Structured frame gives a level of control that facilitates this automation process. As a practical matter, I developed my first EDD over a two month period and began converting books over the next couple of months, but I've been tweaking it ever since. Fred -- Fred Wersan Senior Technical Writer VT MAK 68 Moulton St. Cambridge, MA 02138 617-876-8085 x 124 VR-Vantage, MAK's 3D Visual Solution, is here! Find out how it can fit your simulation at VR-Vantage.com ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: Switching to Structured FrameMaker
I've gotten some wonderful responses both on the list and privately. I'd begun to think that, since a lot of my clients rely on freelancers who come and go, structured FrameMaker might be the way to ensure consistency across documents. Then it occurred to me, how hard is it to get writers on board with structured documentation? If you hire a new person and they don't know structured FrameMaker, how much coaching do you have to do to get them started? And . . . does it really make the usual craziness about autonumbering and variables in headers, footers, TOCs, LOTs, LOFs, and Indexes . . GO AWAY? (I mean, in this situation: new contractor comes on board, gets new template, at some point copies text from an older doc with conflicting paragraph tags; variables and cross-references break; frustration and hair-tearing ensue.) The elimination of that struggle would be worth a lot. Thanks one and all. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Switching to Structured FrameMaker
Hi Nancy: Structured FrameMaker goes a long way towards consistency, but it can't enforce everything. I'll start with the good news: The reason my SMEs prefer working in structured FM is because they don't have to apply formatting so much as they have to call a thing what it is. I mean that they can call something a list item, and not worry about whether it's the first list item (so it needs space before it and has a different para style), or the last list item (so it needs space after it), or one in the middle. Yes, they still have to choose between an ordered list (uses numbers), or an unordered list (uses bullets), but if they took one list item from one kind of list and put it in the other, the formatting would automatically change for them. The structure also (helps to) enforce certain rules. For example, if you always want a caption under your diagrams, you can specify that in your structure. Then the caption element automatically shows up at the top of the list with a big bold checkmark to remind them to put it there, and there's a red box in the structure view showing that something is missing. They can ignore all this and still save the file, but at least it's easy to find the missing thing. Oh, that's another good thing. Instead of seeing a long list of character and paragraph styles, you'll only see the ones that are valid in the place where your cursor is in the structure. It cuts down on scrolling and having too many choices. Finally, just the process of implementing structure will force you to standardize existing documents and how you write. It's a great (if somewhat time-consuming) exercise. I gave my SMEs a one-hour tutorial on using structured FM, about 2 pages of notes, a long document explaining all the elements and what they mean (reference material; I doubt most of them read it), and away they went. Most of them had never used FM before at all (which might have been a good thing :-). Then I made myself available for any problems because the last thing you want is a frustrated user. It's been very successful except with a few of them who don't use structured FM often enough to remember the tutorial, and don't have time to learn it all over again. Some people just won't give up Word. :-( NOTE: The SMEs are just using the template and writing content (with graphics and tables). They are not defining elements nor styles nor anything like that. Boy, do I wish we had a FrameMaker-Lite that would just let authors do their thing for less money! But I digress. Now the bad news: - Structured FrameMaker cannot enforce the use of variables. Users can still choose to type text instead of using a variable, or they can choose the wrong one. - Cross-references that are copied from one document to another still have to be redirected. - You will have to give people a choice of elements to use at any given spot, and they can still choose inappropriately. Hopefully, it will be obvious to them and they won't do it on purpose. :-) In your example of an older document and a new template, the outcome depends on whether the older document is structured, too. If it is, then the copy and paste is fairly seamless except that cross-references will still have to be updated or they might point to the old documents. Variables will copy over as usual: if they have a new name, they are copied to the new document. If they have a duplicate name, they take on the value of the target document. You should design the structure so that it is valid in older and newer documents. However, if the older document is unstructured and new template is structured, you have to use a conversion table or tag (apply elements to) the piece that's been copied and pasted. When you apply the structure, the formatting happens automagically. You might consider using a standard XML schema such as DITA if you're worried about a steady stream of new people. Then the contractors might be familiar with the elements and structure, and that will certainly cut down the learning curve. On the other hand, if they're not familiar with DITA, it might increase it. I really love structured over unstructured; does it show? ;-) Fei Min Lorente -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 9:44 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Switching to Structured FrameMaker I've gotten some wonderful responses both on the list and privately. I'd begun to think that, since a lot of my clients rely on freelancers who come and go, structured FrameMaker might be the way to ensure consistency across documents. Then it occurred to me, how hard is it to get writers on board with structured documentation? If you hire a new person and they don't know structured FrameMaker, how much coaching do you have to do to get them started? And . . . does it really make the usual craziness about autonumbering and variables
RE: Switching to Structured FrameMaker
Even if the person knows structured FrameMaker, they do not know _your_ structured FrameMaker. When you go structured, you will need to document it all, just in case you are hit by the proverbial bus, and someone has to carry on after you. This is the documentation you make available to the new person. Most of the tech writers I have ever worked with were very good at figuring things out for themselves. Coaching of any new person is to be expected. How much coaching an individual needs should be looked into during the interview process. -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 6:44 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Switching to Structured FrameMaker If you hire a new person and they don't know structured FrameMaker, how much coaching do you have to do to get them started? ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Switching to Structured FrameMaker
--What was your documentation situation? (How many product lines, how many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much translation?) > I am a single writer documenting 8 products =~ 16 books and 10 or so online help systems, with a fair degree of text reuse, plus occasional contract manuals added in. --Why did you decide that it was time to switch to structured documentation? What kind of limit had you reached? > I did it so that I could single-source my online help. I was using a dead-end HAT tool. I now use a home-grown system that wouldn't be possible without the XML output from Framemaker. --What kinds of output do you create from structured FrameMaker? books and online help --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more efficient? Has it improved the responsiveness or quality of your documentation? > I couldn't do what I do without it, both in terms of my online help process and text reuse. I think that even aside from the XML/reuse issue, structured frame fosters improved document quality. To do it right, you have to get your formatting and style under control - no rogue para and char formats etc. I also rely heavily on plugins from West Street Consulting and scripts that I've written with framescript to automate and manage my doc process. Structured frame gives a level of control that facilitates this automation process. As a practical matter, I developed my first EDD over a two month period and began converting books over the next couple of months, but I've been tweaking it ever since. Fred -- Fred Wersan Senior Technical Writer VT MAK 68 Moulton St. Cambridge, MA 02138 617-876-8085 x 124 VR-Vantage, MAK's 3D Visual Solution, is here! Find out how it can fit your simulation at VR-Vantage.com
Switching to Structured FrameMaker
I've gotten some wonderful responses both on the list and privately. I'd begun to think that, since a lot of my clients rely on freelancers who come and go, structured FrameMaker might be the way to ensure consistency across documents. Then it occurred to me, how hard is it to get writers on board with structured documentation? If you hire a new person and they don't know structured FrameMaker, how much coaching do you have to do to get them started? And . . . does it really make the usual craziness about autonumbering and variables in headers, footers, TOCs, LOTs, LOFs, and Indexes . . GO AWAY? (I mean, in this situation: new contractor comes on board, gets new template, at some point copies text from an older doc with conflicting paragraph tags; variables and cross-references break; frustration and hair-tearing ensue.) The elimination of that struggle would be worth a lot. Thanks one and all.
Switching to Structured FrameMaker
Hi Nancy: Structured FrameMaker goes a long way towards consistency, but it can't enforce everything. I'll start with the good news: The reason my SMEs prefer working in structured FM is because they don't have to apply formatting so much as they have to call a thing what it is. I mean that they can call something a list item, and not worry about whether it's the first list item (so it needs space before it and has a different para style), or the last list item (so it needs space after it), or one in the middle. Yes, they still have to choose between an ordered list (uses numbers), or an unordered list (uses bullets), but if they took one list item from one kind of list and put it in the other, the formatting would automatically change for them. The structure also (helps to) enforce certain rules. For example, if you always want a caption under your diagrams, you can specify that in your structure. Then the caption element automatically shows up at the top of the list with a big bold checkmark to remind them to put it there, and there's a red box in the structure view showing that something is missing. They can ignore all this and still save the file, but at least it's easy to find the missing thing. Oh, that's another good thing. Instead of seeing a long list of character and paragraph styles, you'll only see the ones that are valid in the place where your cursor is in the structure. It cuts down on scrolling and having too many choices. Finally, just the process of implementing structure will force you to standardize existing documents and how you write. It's a great (if somewhat time-consuming) exercise. I gave my SMEs a one-hour tutorial on using structured FM, about 2 pages of notes, a long document explaining all the elements and what they mean (reference material; I doubt most of them read it), and away they went. Most of them had never used FM before at all (which might have been a good thing :-). Then I made myself available for any problems because the last thing you want is a frustrated user. It's been very successful except with a few of them who don't use structured FM often enough to remember the tutorial, and don't have time to learn it all over again. Some people just won't give up Word. :-( NOTE: The SMEs are just using the template and writing content (with graphics and tables). They are not defining elements nor styles nor anything like that. Boy, do I wish we had a FrameMaker-Lite that would just let authors do their thing for less money! But I digress. Now the bad news: - Structured FrameMaker cannot enforce the use of variables. Users can still choose to type text instead of using a variable, or they can choose the wrong one. - Cross-references that are copied from one document to another still have to be redirected. - You will have to give people a choice of elements to use at any given spot, and they can still choose inappropriately. Hopefully, it will be obvious to them and they won't do it on purpose. :-) In your example of an "older document" and a new template, the outcome depends on whether the older document is structured, too. If it is, then the copy and paste is fairly seamless except that cross-references will still have to be updated or they might point to the old documents. Variables will copy over as usual: if they have a new name, they are copied to the new document. If they have a duplicate name, they take on the value of the target document. You should design the structure so that it is valid in older and newer documents. However, if the older document is unstructured and new template is structured, you have to use a conversion table or tag (apply elements to) the piece that's been copied and pasted. When you apply the structure, the formatting happens automagically. You might consider using a standard XML schema such as DITA if you're worried about a steady stream of new people. Then the contractors might be familiar with the elements and structure, and that will certainly cut down the learning curve. On the other hand, if they're not familiar with DITA, it might increase it. I really love structured over unstructured; does it show? ;-) Fei Min Lorente -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 9:44 AM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Switching to Structured FrameMaker I've gotten some wonderful responses both on the list and privately. I'd begun to think that, since a lot of my clients rely on freelancers who come and go, structured FrameMaker might be the way to ensure consistency across documents. Then it occurred to me, how hard is it to get writers on board with structured documentation? If you hire a new person and they don't know structured FrameMaker, how much coaching do you have to do to get them started? And . . . does it really make the usual craziness about aut
Switching to Structured FrameMaker
Even if the person knows structured FrameMaker, they do not know _your_ structured FrameMaker. When you go structured, you will need to document it all, just in case you are hit by the proverbial bus, and someone has to carry on after you. This is the documentation you make available to the new person. Most of the tech writers I have ever worked with were very good at figuring things out for themselves. Coaching of any new person is to be expected. How much coaching an individual needs should be looked into during the interview process. -Original Message- From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 6:44 AM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Switching to Structured FrameMaker If you hire a new person and they don't know structured FrameMaker, how much coaching do you have to do to get them started?
Switching to Structured FrameMaker
Hi, all. With regard to structured FrameMaker, I am very late to the party. In fact, I have never used it yet. There's a good chance I'll be asked to investigate whether it would be useful to my current client. I thought I'd get a head start on the issues by asking for information from people who have made the switch. Here are my questions: --What was your documentation situation? (How many product lines, how many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much translation?) --Why did you (or your manager) decide that it was time to switch to structured documentation? What kind of limit had you reached? --What kinds of output do you create from structured FrameMaker? --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more efficient? Has it improved the responsiveness or quality of your documentation? Feel free to tell me something else, if my questions don't address your situation. Thanks for all responses. --Nancy ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Switching to Structured FrameMaker
As it turns out, I was about to ask this list the exact same question. We also have always used unstructured FM, but with the recent integration of documentation teams within multiple business lines throughout my company, I can see that structured FM may be considered as part of a solution for content reuse or for single sourcing. I too would be interested in the responses to Nancy's questions. Thanks, Mark -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:09 PM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Switching to Structured FrameMaker Hi, all. With regard to structured FrameMaker, I am very late to the party. In fact, I have never used it yet. There's a good chance I'll be asked to investigate whether it would be useful to my current client. I thought I'd get a head start on the issues by asking for information from people who have made the switch. Here are my questions: --What was your documentation situation? (How many product lines, how many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much translation?) --Why did you (or your manager) decide that it was time to switch to structured documentation? What kind of limit had you reached? --What kinds of output do you create from structured FrameMaker? --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more efficient? Has it improved the responsiveness or quality of your documentation? Feel free to tell me something else, if my questions don't address your situation. Thanks for all responses. --Nancy ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as mark.eichelber...@fiserv.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/mark.eichelberger%40 fiserv.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Switching to Structured FrameMaker
We are still at a sort of fledgling phase of our conversion to DITA, but one of the things I like the most is how easy it is to create a variety of deliverables or reconfigure a deliverable quickly. For example, we thought we were supposed to create one large document for a project, but we found out at the last moment that the project required four smaller documents. It was so easy to create new ditamaps to reorganize the topics. It took us only a couple of hours to recreate the deliverables. Nadine --- On Wed, 12/9/09, Eichelberger, Mark mark.eichelber...@fiserv.com wrote: From: Eichelberger, Mark mark.eichelber...@fiserv.com Subject: RE: Switching to Structured FrameMaker To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Date: Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 3:10 PM As it turns out, I was about to ask this list the exact same question. We also have always used unstructured FM, but with the recent integration of documentation teams within multiple business lines throughout my company, I can see that structured FM may be considered as part of a solution for content reuse or for single sourcing. I too would be interested in the responses to Nancy's questions. Thanks, Mark -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:09 PM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Switching to Structured FrameMaker Hi, all.. With regard to structured FrameMaker, I am very late to the party. In fact, I have never used it yet. There's a good chance I'll be asked to investigate whether it would be useful to my current client. I thought I'd get a head start on the issues by asking for information from people who have made the switch. Here are my questions: --What was your documentation situation? (How many product lines, how many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much translation?) --Why did you (or your manager) decide that it was time to switch to structured documentation? What kind of limit had you reached? --What kinds of output do you create from structured FrameMaker? --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more efficient? Has it improved the responsiveness or quality of your documentation? Feel free to tell me something else, if my questions don't address your situation. Thanks for all responses. --Nancy ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as mark.eichelber...@fiserv.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/mark.eichelberger%40 fiserv.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www..frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as generic...@yahoo.ca. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/generic668%40yahoo.ca Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: Switching to Structured FrameMaker
At one larger router company that uses XML and proprietary structure, it takes 20-25% longer to create a document/manual than with unstructured FM. Better tools and a more general structure may reduce the time, but Also, they discovered after several years of doing this that only 33-40% of content was _ever_ resused. YMMV, but make sure it's going to work for you before you commit. Art Campbell art.campb...@gmail.com ... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl. -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358 On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Writer generic...@yahoo.ca wrote: We are still at a sort of fledgling phase of our conversion to DITA, but one of the things I like the most is how easy it is to create a variety of deliverables or reconfigure a deliverable quickly. For example, we thought we were supposed to create one large document for a project, but we found out at the last moment that the project required four smaller documents. It was so easy to create new ditamaps to reorganize the topics. It took us only a couple of hours to recreate the deliverables. Nadine --- On Wed, 12/9/09, Eichelberger, Mark mark.eichelber...@fiserv.com wrote: From: Eichelberger, Mark mark.eichelber...@fiserv.com Subject: RE: Switching to Structured FrameMaker To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Date: Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 3:10 PM As it turns out, I was about to ask this list the exact same question. We also have always used unstructured FM, but with the recent integration of documentation teams within multiple business lines throughout my company, I can see that structured FM may be considered as part of a solution for content reuse or for single sourcing. I too would be interested in the responses to Nancy's questions. Thanks, Mark -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:09 PM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Switching to Structured FrameMaker Hi, all.. With regard to structured FrameMaker, I am very late to the party. In fact, I have never used it yet. There's a good chance I'll be asked to investigate whether it would be useful to my current client. I thought I'd get a head start on the issues by asking for information from people who have made the switch. Here are my questions: --What was your documentation situation? (How many product lines, how many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much translation?) --Why did you (or your manager) decide that it was time to switch to structured documentation? What kind of limit had you reached? --What kinds of output do you create from structured FrameMaker? --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more efficient? Has it improved the responsiveness or quality of your documentation? Feel free to tell me something else, if my questions don't address your situation. Thanks for all responses. --Nancy ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as mark.eichelber...@fiserv.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/mark.eichelberger%40 fiserv.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www..frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as generic...@yahoo.ca. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/generic668%40yahoo.ca Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as art.campb...@gmail.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/art.campbell%40gmail.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http
RE: Switching to Structured FrameMaker
Hi Nancy: I did a presentation about our switch from unstructured to structured FrameMaker back in 2005, so let me know if you want me to send it to you. It answers all your questions, such as how many pages we had, why we did it, what our output was, etc. I'm a lone writer too, but we don't do translation. It's been about five years since we switched to structured FrameMaker, and I'm very happy with the results. I personally prefer to work in structured FM, and the SMEs who are using it prefer it too. Those who don't like to use FrameMaker have the option of writing in XML because of the structure. We've saved loads of time (sorry, don't have numbers) and loads of inaccuracies by being able to convert comments in code to XML-tagged documents that import directly into FrameMaker. I've also saved loads of time by having SMEs write either in FrameMaker or XML, so I think we've gotten our money back by now. However, I've been told that it's very unusual to be able to get SMEs to work in FrameMaker. If you're an STC member, Sarah O'Keefe wrote an article about whether structured authoring was a wise investment for small documentation shops (like lone writer places), and that article is supposed to appear in the December issue of Intercom. That might help, too. By the way, structured FrameMaker doesn't have to mean XML; I just found it useful to be able to do both. Fei Min -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:09 PM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Switching to Structured FrameMaker Hi, all. With regard to structured FrameMaker, I am very late to the party. In fact, I have never used it yet. There's a good chance I'll be asked to investigate whether it would be useful to my current client. I thought I'd get a head start on the issues by asking for information from people who have made the switch. Here are my questions: --What was your documentation situation? (How many product lines, how many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much translation?) --Why did you (or your manager) decide that it was time to switch to structured documentation? What kind of limit had you reached? --What kinds of output do you create from structured FrameMaker? --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more efficient? Has it improved the responsiveness or quality of your documentation? Feel free to tell me something else, if my questions don't address your situation. Thanks for all responses. --Nancy ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as feimin.lore...@onsemi.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/feimin.lorente%40ons emi.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Switching to Structured FrameMaker
Hi, all. With regard to structured FrameMaker, I am very late to the party. In fact, I have never used it yet. There's a good chance I'll be asked to investigate whether it would be useful to my current client. I thought I'd get a head start on the issues by asking for information from people who have made the switch. Here are my questions: --What was your documentation situation? (How many product lines, how many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much translation?) --Why did you (or your manager) decide that it was time to switch to structured documentation? What kind of limit had you reached? --What kinds of output do you create from structured FrameMaker? --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more efficient? Has it improved the responsiveness or quality of your documentation? Feel free to tell me something else, if my questions don't address your situation. Thanks for all responses. --Nancy
Switching to Structured FrameMaker
As it turns out, I was about to ask this list the exact same question. We also have always used unstructured FM, but with the recent integration of documentation teams within multiple business lines throughout my company, I can see that structured FM may be considered as part of a solution for content reuse or for single sourcing. I too would be interested in the responses to Nancy's questions. Thanks, Mark -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:09 PM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Switching to Structured FrameMaker Hi, all. With regard to structured FrameMaker, I am very late to the party. In fact, I have never used it yet. There's a good chance I'll be asked to investigate whether it would be useful to my current client. I thought I'd get a head start on the issues by asking for information from people who have made the switch. Here are my questions: --What was your documentation situation? (How many product lines, how many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much translation?) --Why did you (or your manager) decide that it was time to switch to structured documentation? What kind of limit had you reached? --What kinds of output do you create from structured FrameMaker? --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more efficient? Has it improved the responsiveness or quality of your documentation? Feel free to tell me something else, if my questions don't address your situation. Thanks for all responses. --Nancy ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as Mark.Eichelberger at fiserv.com. Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/mark.eichelberger%40 fiserv.com Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Switching to Structured FrameMaker
We are still at a sort of fledgling phase of our conversion to DITA, but one of the things I like the most is how easy it is to create a variety of deliverables or reconfigure a deliverable quickly. For example, we thought we were supposed to create one large document for a project, but we found out at the last moment that the project required four smaller documents. It was so easy to create new ditamaps to reorganize the topics. It took us only a couple of hours to recreate the deliverables. Nadine --- On Wed, 12/9/09, Eichelberger, Mark wrote: > From: Eichelberger, Mark > Subject: RE: Switching to Structured FrameMaker > To: framers at lists.frameusers.com > Date: Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 3:10 PM > As it turns out, I was about to ask > this list the exact same question. > We also have always used unstructured FM, but with the > recent > integration of documentation teams within multiple business > lines > throughout my company, I can see that structured FM may be > considered as > part of a solution for content reuse or for single > sourcing.? I too > would be interested in the responses to Nancy's questions. > > Thanks, > Mark > > -Original Message- > From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com > [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] > On Behalf Of Nancy Allison > Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:09 PM > To: framers at lists.frameusers.com > Subject: Switching to Structured FrameMaker > > Hi, all.. > > With regard to structured FrameMaker, I am very late to the > party. In > fact, I have never used it yet. There's a good chance I'll > be asked to > investigate whether it would be useful to my current > client. I thought > I'd get a head start on the issues by asking for > information from people > who have made the switch. Here are my questions: > > --What was your documentation situation? (How many product > lines, how > many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much > translation?) > > --Why did you (or your manager) decide that it was time to > switch to > structured documentation? What kind of limit had you > reached? > > --What kinds of output do you create from structured > FrameMaker? > > --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more > efficient? Has > it improved the responsiveness or quality of your > documentation? > > Feel free to tell me something else, if my questions don't > address your > situation. > > Thanks for all responses. > > --Nancy > ___ > > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as Mark.Eichelberger at fiserv.com. > > Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com > or visit > http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/mark.eichelberger%40 > fiserv.com > > Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. > Visit > http://www..frameusers.com/ for more resources and > info. > ___ > > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as generic668 at yahoo.ca. > > Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com > or visit > http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/generic668%40yahoo.ca > > Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. > Visit > http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and > info. > >
Switching to Structured FrameMaker
At one larger router company that uses XML and proprietary structure, it takes 20-25% longer to create a document/manual than with unstructured FM. Better tools and a more general structure may reduce the time, but Also, they discovered after several years of doing this that only 33-40% of content was _ever_ resused. YMMV, but make sure it's going to work for you before you commit. Art Campbell art.campbell at gmail.com "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358 On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Writer wrote: > We are still at a sort of fledgling phase of our conversion to DITA, but > one of the things I like the most is how easy it is to create a variety of > deliverables or reconfigure a deliverable quickly. For example, we thought > we were supposed to create one large document for a project, but we found > out at the last moment that the project required four smaller documents. It > was so easy to create new ditamaps to reorganize the topics. It took us only > a couple of hours to recreate the deliverables. > > Nadine > > --- On Wed, 12/9/09, Eichelberger, Mark > wrote: > > > From: Eichelberger, Mark > > Subject: RE: Switching to Structured FrameMaker > > To: framers at lists.frameusers.com > > Date: Wednesday, December 9, 2009, 3:10 PM > > As it turns out, I was about to ask > > this list the exact same question. > > We also have always used unstructured FM, but with the > > recent > > integration of documentation teams within multiple business > > lines > > throughout my company, I can see that structured FM may be > > considered as > > part of a solution for content reuse or for single > > sourcing. I too > > would be interested in the responses to Nancy's questions. > > > > Thanks, > > Mark > > > > -Original Message- > > From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com > > [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] > > On Behalf Of Nancy Allison > > Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:09 PM > > To: framers at lists.frameusers.com > > Subject: Switching to Structured FrameMaker > > > > Hi, all.. > > > > With regard to structured FrameMaker, I am very late to the > > party. In > > fact, I have never used it yet. There's a good chance I'll > > be asked to > > investigate whether it would be useful to my current > > client. I thought > > I'd get a head start on the issues by asking for > > information from people > > who have made the switch. Here are my questions: > > > > --What was your documentation situation? (How many product > > lines, how > > many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much > > translation?) > > > > --Why did you (or your manager) decide that it was time to > > switch to > > structured documentation? What kind of limit had you > > reached? > > > > --What kinds of output do you create from structured > > FrameMaker? > > > > --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more > > efficient? Has > > it improved the responsiveness or quality of your > > documentation? > > > > Feel free to tell me something else, if my questions don't > > address your > > situation. > > > > Thanks for all responses. > > > > --Nancy > > ___ > > > > > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as Mark.Eichelberger at fiserv.com. > > > > Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. > > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > > framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com > > or visit > > http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/mark.eichelberger%40 > > fiserv.com > > > > Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. > > Visit > > http://www..frameusers.com/ for more resources and > > info. > > ___ > > > > > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as generic668 at yahoo.ca. > > > > Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. > > > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > > framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com > > or visit > http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/generic668%40yahoo.ca > > > > Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. > > Visit > > http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and > > info. > > > > > > ___ > > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as art.campbell at gmail.com. > > Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com > or visit > http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/art.campbell%40gmail.com > > Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit > http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. >
Switching to Structured FrameMaker
Hi Nancy: I did a presentation about our switch from unstructured to structured FrameMaker back in 2005, so let me know if you want me to send it to you. It answers all your questions, such as how many pages we had, why we did it, what our output was, etc. I'm a lone writer too, but we don't do translation. It's been about five years since we switched to structured FrameMaker, and I'm very happy with the results. I personally prefer to work in structured FM, and the SMEs who are using it prefer it too. Those who don't like to use FrameMaker have the option of writing in XML because of the structure. We've saved loads of time (sorry, don't have numbers) and loads of inaccuracies by being able to convert comments in code to XML-tagged documents that import directly into FrameMaker. I've also saved loads of time by having SMEs write either in FrameMaker or XML, so I think we've gotten our money back by now. However, I've been told that it's very unusual to be able to get SMEs to work in FrameMaker. If you're an STC member, Sarah O'Keefe wrote an article about whether structured authoring was a wise investment for small documentation shops (like lone writer places), and that article is supposed to appear in the December issue of Intercom. That might help, too. By the way, structured FrameMaker doesn't have to mean XML; I just found it useful to be able to do both. Fei Min -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Allison Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 2:09 PM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Switching to Structured FrameMaker Hi, all. With regard to structured FrameMaker, I am very late to the party. In fact, I have never used it yet. There's a good chance I'll be asked to investigate whether it would be useful to my current client. I thought I'd get a head start on the issues by asking for information from people who have made the switch. Here are my questions: --What was your documentation situation? (How many product lines, how many publications, how much single-sourcing, how much translation?) --Why did you (or your manager) decide that it was time to switch to structured documentation? What kind of limit had you reached? --What kinds of output do you create from structured FrameMaker? --Has structured FrameMaker made your work easier or more efficient? Has it improved the responsiveness or quality of your documentation? Feel free to tell me something else, if my questions don't address your situation. Thanks for all responses. --Nancy ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as feimin.lorente at onsemi.com. Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/feimin.lorente%40ons emi.com Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
