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.
> I'm going to say (write) this again... I don't think the real issue of the
> OP is a matter of Word vs. Framemaker.
>
> Rather, I think it's, "If we choose to not use Word as our layout
> application (since it's really just a word processor), what other tools
> should we be considering?" That is, I gathered from the OP that she or her
> manager may be unaware of the capabilities of InDesign, a tool which may be
> a far more appropriate choice for her project/company/budget/temperament.
So, to recap, here's the situation as I understand it: The company has been using Word. Bobbi has come in as a contract technical writer, and she's experienced with FM, but has never used Word for such a project.
Why would you say the issue isn't Word vs. FM? Other than your enthusiasm for ID, that is. :-)
The issue is Word vs. FM because one is a comfortable fit for the company (no change required) and the other is a comfortable fit for their writer (no learning curve or stumbling blocks).
Discarding both of those alternatives in favor of a third -- one that's new to both the writer and the company -- strikes me as a poor idea unless that alternative offers compelling advantages over the other two in this situation.
Based on Bobbi's follow-up, in which she mentioned the future possibility of single-sourcing for different users and different outputs, I'd lean toward FM if I were in her shoes. But I could see sticking with Word, at least until those future possibilities actually materialized.
What I can't imagine, at least in contract work, is pushing the client into an entirely new application that they'd have to pay me to learn and that offers no compelling advantage.
IMHO, of course. :-)
Richard G. Combs
Senior Technical Writer
Polycom, Inc.
richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
303-223-5111
------
rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom
303-903-6372
------
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help.
Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need. Try
Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days. http://www.doctohelp.com
LavaCon 2010 in San Diego Sept 29 - Oct 2 is now open for registration.
Use referral code TECHWR-L for $50 off conference tuition!
See program at: http://lavacon.org/
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
