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.
RE: FrameMaker releases (was FrameMaker vs Ventura) and PDF Mark
Subject:RE: FrameMaker releases (was FrameMaker vs Ventura) and PDF Mark From:edunn -at- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com To:Dan Emory <danemory -at- primenet -dot- com>, TECHWR-L -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com Date:Tue, 3 Oct 2000 14:11:38 -0400
Dan Emory wrote: "Admittedly one WWP PRO license could be used to create custom
templates that are then available to users who have WWP SE, but that's not an
ideal solution."
Why not? I'd actually view this as the ideal situation. Template issues and
control are then the responsibility of one individual.
A less than ideal situation is the current lack of tools to enforce templates in
FM (or Word).
Here's a hint for a FM plugin: tie a document to a template and when the
template is updated, the document is also updated. When updated, all the
extraneous stuff that the various authors add is stripped (I've seen writers add
15 reference pages of non-contract related garbage and fill the paragraph and
character catalogs with dozens of unapproved tags). Something akin to FM+SGML
when the document is outputted as SGML and then brought back into FM.
While many on the list may enjoy tweaking fonts, spacing, kerning, colours, and
page layout, these activities are a complete waste of time if you are not the
one (or part of the group) responsible for maintaining the templates.
