Re: in search for better tools

[Robert Lauriston <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>]

You should consider handling this with variables. You just need to
maintain a set of variables for each variation, and import the correct
set when generating deliverables. It's a good idea to create a generic
set where the variable value is its name in angle brackets for use
when writing and editing and a template for variable definitions in
which the variables are sorted alphabetically and each is preceded by
its name in plain text. It's no more complicated to maintain ten sets
of variables than two.

In FrameMaker, the number of conditions per document determines how
complicated it will be. If you only need two different sets of
deliverables, it's trivial. More than that, it takes some effort and
you need to document the procedure carefully. If you have up to ten
variations, upgrading to FrameMaker 8 or 9 to get the new conditional
statements might be worth the money--though note that FrameMaker 9 has
a completely new UI that may interfere with your work, particularly if
you're used to driving FrameMaker from the keyboard.

Webworks vs. MIF2Go makes no difference here. If you have MIF2Go,
there's no reason to waste any more money on WebWorks, just switch to
MIF2Go.

2009/12/8 GILLIOTTE Valérie <vgilliotte -at- mega -dot- com>:
> Hello !
>
> Thanks for your input all ...
>
> About the many people having sucessfully managed dozens of conditions with old Frame versions, I had heard of that but we had not had the need so far, and now the complexity it involves scares me. I thougt Frame 9 was a better solution, but you're right, it might not be the case.
>
> For now we don't know exactly how many conditions we would need as products are growing fast here ... That's the problem and that's why I am scared of dealing with conditions with Frame 7.
>
> @ Robert : is it the number of variations per document that matters ? (if so we might not reach 10) or the number of conditions for all our products (some products are totally separate, fortunately). I might enquire on a Frame-specific list ...
>
> I kwow about the necessary upgrade to a proper version of Webworks (prices are so high now), I've just enquired. Maybe we could look into Mif2Go instead but I know it is not WYSIWIG and I don't know if it can replace Automap.
>
> Personnally I would not mind not rushing but my boss is scared at the idea of keeping up the work with an un-supported version of Webworks and Automap (I would be a bit too within a couple of years maybe)
>
> Someone suggested looking into Flare, as the import from Frame works well apparently ... I don't know.
>
> Thanks for the clarification about XML and structured Frame. Actually, it could help on another of our problems maybe: filtering the documentation to the proper profile of user, but I'm still not sure. Maybe there is another way too.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Are you looking for one documentation tool that does it all? Author, 
build, test, and publish your Help files with just one easy-to-use tool.
Try the latest Doc-To-Help 2009 v3 risk-free for 30-days at:
http://www.doctohelp.com/ 

Help & Manual 5: The all-in-one help authoring tool. True single- sourcing -- 
generate 8 different formats and as many different versions as you need 
from just one project. Fast and intuitive.  http://www.helpandmanual.com/

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- 

To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info. 

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat