Structured Frame

[mcarr at allette.com.au]

Miriam Boral wrote:

> I'm the sole tech writer for a very small company, but we have a
> large suite of documentation. I'm beginning to teach myself
> structured Frame both because I feel it's the way of the future (and
> therefore worth learning) and also to explore how it might (or might
> not) be beneficial to the company I work for. I'm interested in
> hearing from others about their experience working with it and how
> they feel it benefits their work.

In all likelihood it will be beneficial to the company that you work for,
as XML provides access to the data that your company does not currently
have. If they can't leverage from it, it will be for one of two reasons -
they're either not trying hard enough, or the data that you're providing
them with is inadequate for their purposes.

Your interests are aligned with those of the company - if you wish to
learn about doing structure well, you need to provide the company with
something that works. That means analyzing dataflows and developing plans
for the broad and long term use of information within the company.
Developing structures that make it easy or interesting to author good
hardcopy will probably fall well short of what could be accomplished.
Without meaning any disrespect, you probably would benefit from getting a
consultant in to help. Money spent now may prevent you from wasting a lot
of time later.

Disclaimer - among other things I'm a consultant, but my company hasn't
done a FrameMaker project for a couple of years at least. The principles
apply no matter what the application.


Marcus Carr