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.
Subject:Re: Web Works Publisher From:Mary McWilliams Johnson <mary -at- SUPERCONNECT -dot- COM> Date:Sat, 20 Jun 1998 21:41:16 -0500
I understand that lots of folks like WebWorks Publisher. I tried it for a
short time with FrameMaker and found the learning curve simply not worth
the trouble. I moved on to using Word, and using its HTML conversion to get
HTML output, then cleaning things up in Homesite.
Later on I wished I had stayed with FrameMaker since I understand that
Frame 5.5 comes with an HTML conversion tool (Hot Tamale) built in. It
seems that Hot Tamale works better than Web Works Publisher or HTML
Transit, particularly if you have a combination of numbered headings and
automatically numbered paragraphs.
Cordially,
------------------------------º><º------------------------------
Mary McWilliams Johnson
McJohnson Communications
Documentation Specialist
Web Site Design, Development and Graphics
www.superconnect.com
------------------------------º><º------------------------------
At 04:45 AM 6/20/98 -0700, Paul Carr wrote:
>>From: "Amy E. Brown" <abrown -at- OPENMARKET -dot- COM>
>>Subject: Conversion from Frame into HTML Help
>
>>Has anyone out there done an HTML Help conversion with WebWorks
>>Publisher? If so, how did it turn out?
>
>We are experimenting with WWP even now. The results looks promising, but
>it takes forever.
>
>Based on multiple emails I have received on this subject, I would say
>that, overall, people are able to use the product. However, I have
>received more than one email from people saying they had thrown up their
>hands and walked away WWP because of all the havoc it was causing (such
>as Frame bombs - something we have seen). Others said that, yes, it
>takes forever and a day to set up the Frame docs and the WWP mapping and
>the WWP macros and such, but, eventually, they were successful.
>
>One serious problem with WWP is the lack of any sort of visual record of
>what their maps (styles, tags) actually look like when they come out of
>the conversion. You have to do a ridiculous amount of guessing and
>experimenting when setting up your maps, since you don't really know at
>all what a WWP map will look like when it's done.
>
>I spent a lot of time creating some documents that list and actually show
>what the WWP tags look like in HTML (and winhelp). This is something
>that WWP (Quadralay) should include with their software, even the trial
>download.
>
>I found out that there are WWP classes in parts of the US. I am going to
>try to have my fearless leader send me to one (if we buy the software -
>not a certainty). I have the feeling that a class will be very
>beneficial, considering the likely need to make fairly complex
>conversions.
>
>Paul Carr
>solas -at- jps -dot- net
>
