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.
Strongly recommend you ask Rob Little at rlittle -at- Exchange -dot- Microsoft -dot- com --
he posts occasionally to the WORD-PC list.
Dan Goldstein
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Posada
>
> Ok, guys...here's the thing.
> I'm trying to make a case for FM at my place and I was talking to my
> manager. He told me that one of the arguments that was
> presented to him
> a while ago as a reason that FM was not needed was along the lines of
> "Why do we need something other than Word...Microsoft uses it
> to created
> all their documentation, including the book published under 'Microsoft
> Press'".
> Can anyone point me to definitive authority that disputes
> that? I really
> doubt that MS would use Word to create 965 pages of "Microsoft Visio
> Version 2002 Inside Out" and similar titles?
> What I think would be the case is that the writers work in Word to
> create content, but then run that content through some post
> process that
> creates the final output...maybe the post process is FM, maybe it's
> custom, but I need to know...it may be the key to getting out
> from under Microsoft Word's thumb.
> Anyone?
> John Posada
