Re: 3 ring binders or no?

[Richard Lippincott <rlippinc -at- BEV -dot- ETN -dot- COM>]

Paul commented that it's cheaper to revise an entire manual than it is to
supply update pages.  He supplied some good numbers to support his case.

Although you can't cover -every- combination of pages/update schedules, I
think his observation will generally hold true.

At my last military manual related job, I was revising very similar versions
of a jet engine maintenance manual.  One version went to the U.S. Air Force,
the other to a foreign customer.  Although most of the content was the same,
they were separate manuals.

The USAF manual was updated via change pages, we'd ship a 750-page change to
them (2,000 page manual) every six months.  Due to MILSPECS, the USAF
-required- the "change page" method.  The logic was that "750 pages is cheaper
than 2,000 pages, right?"

Of course, this didn't take into account that the printing process is not the
most expensive part of the job.

The foreign customer said "Update the manual in a way that is most cost
effective."  We quickly switched to 100% revisions for them.  They'd get a
brand-new 2,000 page manual twice a year.  They'd chuck the old one, and
work from the new one.

No dusty piles of change packages.  No mis-filed pages.  No hand-written
notes in the margins.

And it was easier for me to update the book by revising than to have to bother
with insert pages, A-pages, and so forth.

Although it would -appear- at a glance that the change-page method is cheaper,
you can, if you dig up the numbers, prove that 100% revision is the way to
go.  DTP methods are what has made this possible, IMOH.

Rick Lippincott
Eaton Semiconductor
rlippinc -at- bev -dot- etn -dot- com