TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
<snip>Framemaker is a firsst-rate tool but is much harder to learn</snip>
[than PageMaker]
Not to pick on Al, because I've seen this idea repeated here many times, but
when I started this job 7 months ago they were using PageMaker. I
recommended they switch to FrameMaker, which I had never used before, even
though our manuals are only about 100 pages each. And I am so glad I did.
Not only was FrameMaker *easier* to learn (and I had used PageMaker briefly
before), it would have been extremely difficult for me to manage TOCs,
Indexes, cross-references and tables in PageMaker with the ease I do it in
Frame. I use conditional text extensively for single-sourcing, which is not
even available with PageMaker.
For me, Frame was easy to learn (the basics and more), and it was definitely
the right tool for what I'm doing. Of course, if the students are primarily
doing marketing materials, PageMaker would be better. My point is just that
I do not think FrameMaker is more difficult to learn at all - just
different.
