Structuring documents (was RE: Adobe's New Corporate Strategies)

[Matt Sullivan]

The question isn't/wasn't whether or not to structure...that decision is
based on (among other things):
-number of authors
-level of reuse
-need to enforce content model
-need to pass content between one organizational group and another 

If the powers that be decide there is an ROI to structure, then that's what
you'll do.

Once that decision is made, as with any software or format conversion, there
will be a conversion of legacy docs to the new format.

As noted by myself, Bernard, and others, the ease of conversion to XML or
DITA is mostly dependent on the quality of the legacy docs and their
consistency in applying a stylesheet.

If I were asked to convert docs to a format I'm not expert in, I'd expect a
major headache. So should someone without XML, DITA, or DTD experience if
they want to do this by themselves.

 However, relatively speaking, the pain of XML and DITA conversion is not
appreciably greater than any other conversion, if you are going to retain
full use of references, toc's, linking, graphics, etc.

As you can see, from various posts, there are folks that can help. It's not
our place to tell you (without analysis)whether or not to structure but we
can effeciently and economically help with that transition.


-Matt

________________________________

Matt Sullivan
GRAFIX Training

714 960-6840
714 585-2335 cell /txt/sms
skype: mattrsullivan

http://www.grafixtraining.com
http://blogs.roundpeg.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/mattrsullivan
http://twitter.com/mattrsullivan
http://twitter.com/roundpeginc


-----Original Message-----
From: Ed [mailto:hamonwry12 at hotmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 12:22 PM
To: 'Bernard Aschwanden (Publishing Smarter)'; 'Alison Craig'; 'Matt
Sullivan'; 'Joseph Lorenzini'; 'FrameMaker Forum'
Subject: RE: Structuring documents (was RE: Adobe's New Corporate
Strategies)

Just yesterday I dove again into the Frame 7.2 structure folder, looked at
all of the files - DTD, EDD, MOD, etc. Started reading the XML cookbook, and
you know what? It's just not worth it to me as a solo writer. 

Copy and paste is easy and free (unless you're on a 3G iPhone...), and if
the company's going to invest in my job (which they're not), I'd much rather
it be a salary increase. Some of my work includes creating one-page "cheat
sheets" in Adobe Illustrator, and that's one-way content; I'm pretty sure
you can't import XML into Illustrator. 

I do see the benefits of the structured approach - I did it at a prior job -
but the barrier to entry is just way too high if you're the only one that's
going to be implementing it.

-=Ed.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers- 
> bounces at lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of Bernard Aschwanden 
> (Publishing
> Smarter)
> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2010 2:53 PM
> To: 'Alison Craig'; 'Matt Sullivan'; 'Joseph Lorenzini'; 'FrameMaker
Forum'
> Subject: RE: Structuring documents (was RE: Adobe's New Corporate
Strategies)
> 
> The "we" in this case is a company we. So it was me. And one part time 
> resource who did a few hours of work on things I didn't want to work 
> with. A lot of review or fixes to content the client had flagged
as a
> possible concern. In this specific case the content was a collection 
> of references for command line info, but it had a
pattern.
> Once we id'd it all and knew what went where it was mostly painless. 
> And the "we" has years and years of experience on all
this.
> I've worked with Frame since 1992 and with structured FrameMaker 
> (FrameBuilder at the time) since then as well.
> 
> Writers who simply need to use the DITA stuff, not convert it, set it 
> up, develop templates, and lots more can learn the basics pretty 
> quickly. There are good and bad to go with it, but all in all it's
not
> a bad system. Once you know what you can (and cannot) do it's pretty 
> smooth.
> 
> Bernard