Re: XML-based Help Authoring tools for customized help

[eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com]

David Neeley <dbneeley -at- oddpost -dot- com> wrote on 12/15/2003 04:36:49 PM:
> However, for writers new to SGML or
> XML, I have yet to find a tool as easy to learn and become
> productive with as Frame in structured mode is--provided
> there is a properly written EDD in use.

And if anybody can point a few out I'd love to hear of them as well. Looks like
one of the options we're going with is Altonova Authentic.

> To waste all this time on trying to relegate Frame to only
> a specialized role seems to me to be silly. Instead, why
> not convince me about the advantages of another method or
> process? Since the folks who make the most noise regarding
> Frame simply don't seem to be familiar with it, I for one
> would find it more instructive by far.

I'd like that too. I WILL NOT use notepad or any other tool that requires I type
in the tags. I don't see why I should have to in this day and age.

> I quite agree that working in XML without
> worry about formatting would be the best method of all.

> Structured Frame does that, actually, although I too think
> its approach leaves much to be desired. However, so do all
> the other XML authoring tools and environments I have seen so far.

I do actually agree. Authors shouldn't worry about formatting. And I fail to see
how that changes in FrameMaker. Structured or not, if you are using templates,
authors should not be formatting willy-nilly. Whether the formatting is the same
as the final delivery or not is inconsequential. Some kind of formatting is
beneficial to aide the author in differentiating the different element contents
and hierarchy.

And while on the topic of formatting one thought came to me. There is a huge
advantage to having a WYSIWYG interface as close to final delivery as possible.
Formatting errors can be caught by a large number of contributors instead of
relying on proof-reading the final output.

> I also like Mark's example of a "forms based" interface
> custom built for authoring for a particular need and using
> a well-crafted DTD.

When a form can be used to enter and validate data it can be a great idea. But
once the elements have to be applied to smaller granularity than is practical in
a form field, you'll need another solution.

> Of course, the same thing could be
> done with, say, simplified DocBook, if that suited the
> organization's needs...which is where I believe his
> argument may fail (although I suspect much of his points
> are more for rhetorical impact than literal statements of
> fact: "DocBook is not XML"--however much he repeats it, it
> is in substantial fact incorrect. *OF COURSE* DocBook is
> XML. It's not *ALL* of XML, but it certainly is XML!).

Just to pick nits, but Docbook IS NOT XML. Docbook is an XML instance, Docbook
is XML compliant. :P


Eric L. Dunn
Senior Technical Writer



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ROBOHELP FOR FRAMEMAKER TRIAL NOW AVAILABLE!

RoboHelp for FrameMaker is a NEW online publishing tool for FrameMaker that
lets you easily single-source content to online Help, intranet, and Web.  
The interface is designed for FrameMaker users, so there is little or no
learning curve and no macro language required! Call 800-718-4407 for 
competitive pricing or download a trial at: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l4

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.