atw: Re: Arbortext Epic with Style compared with Structured FrameMaker

I've never had to decide between one and the other; but the big difference has 
to be cost.  

Arbortext costs a fortune and really seems to be the type of tool you would use 
if you were on a huge project building a 747.

Alternatively, for a single Frame licence you get a very powerful structured 
environment that will do what you want (ie hard copy and online help) to 
varying degrees (the online help will need some added extras to make it work).

The nature of structured authoring means that whatever tool you use there is a 
large amount of work in setting it up to work the way you want it to work.  
I've experience in designing Frame DTD/EDD and it is alot of fun; very 
challenging indeed.  I've no idea about Arbortext in this regard; but it 
wouldn't surprise me if you needed to get in an Arbortext consultant to set it 
up for you.

> Migrating legacy unstructured FrameMaker
>       Tools and aids in either environment
>       Difficulty in migrating legacy content -- quality of migration aids

It all depends on your existing docs.  Frame has a reasonable conversion 
process built in (it will basically convert a format and wrap it in an element, 
and you can structure this depending on context) but whatever you do the end 
result will require manual processing to get the structure exactly as you would 
want.  

I've no doubt that this would apply regardless of the tool you choose; don't 
believe anyone who tells you otherwise.

> 
> Installing and implementing chosen solution
>       Installation of clients, servers and licencing scheme
>       Degree of integration, i.e. need lots of plugins for acceptable
> functionality?
>       Configuring installation, including user accounts or other access
> requirements
>       Total cost of ownership, viz. purchase, implementation and running
> costs over five years
> 

Frame is pretty straight forward.  Simple client installation.  The structure 
application requires a number of pointer files (DTD, EDD, and a few others) to 
be set up but once it is done, it is done.


> Designing templates -- DTDs or schemas, stylesheets, workflows
>       Capabilities of design tools  -- graphical views v. text
> 

As above.  If you used Frame, the EDD will dictate the design of the hard copy. 
 In terms of online this depends.  You will need another process to take your 
XML into HTML.  I've used mif2Go to simply convert the frame doc (this is a 
cheap and friendly way to do it),  I've also used xslt to process the xml into 
html (this is harder - you need to know xslt - but is more robust and one less 
middleware).  I imagine this will depend on your tech requirements.

> Authoring environment
>       Structure view, ease of restructuring, guided editing
>       Find and replace with reg exps
>       Multiple dictionaries
>       Error checking and project management
> 

This is easy to answer.  Your writers will hate using structured frame when 
they start out.  It can be frustrating and annoying.  Then .... they will love 
it.  This will happen.



> Conditioned content (condition formats, profiles)
>       Creating condition formats/profiles
>       Applying conditioned formats/profiles, and visual indication
>       Support for ORing and ANDing of overlapped conditions
>       Hierarchical conditions
> 

I imagine this would be difficult; I've no direct experience in setting this 
up.  You would need to be using the Frame built in conditional text - not sure 
about this one.


> Generating output -- on-line help and printed documentation
>       Ease of setup
>       Supported help formats
>       Setting up print and PDF output
>       Ease of switching from one type of output to another
> 

As above.  For frame, PDF is simple.  The online help requires additional 
process; but not necessarily complex.


> Content management
>       'Book' control file for managing component files -- chapters,
> appendices, TOCs, etc.
>             (Actually, we would like granularity at the topic level)
>       Alternative books with different combinations of components in
> different sequences

Structured Frame book control is no different to unstructured.  You can have 
either a structured book in xml or leave this unstrutured and have a frame book 
and simply add chapter docs.  Granularity at the topic level is more complex, 
sorry but I've not had experience with frame doing this. I've always worked at 
a chapter/book level.

> 
> Raindrops on roses, And warm woollen mittens
>       What's best and worst about Structured FrameMaker?
>       What's best and worst about Epic with Styler?
>       Any major gotchas to be wary of, e.g. Unicode support?
> 

Best about Structured frame is its robustness, ease of use and flexibility 
(personally, I just loved designing the DTD/EDD and making it work). 
Worst about Structured frame is trying to convince non-believers of its value 
and trying to explain that the reason it doesn't work like Word is one one of 
its great advantages.


> Please reply to the list as no doubt others will be facing this decision in
> the coming years as Adobe lets SFM languish in limbo.  I hope others may
> find the results of this useful. (I have cross-posted to the FrameSGML,
> Austechwriters, Techwr-l, framers@omsys, and framers@frameusers lists.)
> 
> [Windows 2000, FrameMaker 6.0p405, FrameScript 1.27C01, Enhance 2.03,
> Acrobat 4.05.2, mif2go 31u33, WebWorks Publisher 7.0, IXgen 5.5.h, HTML
> Help Workshop 4.74 build 8702.0, HTML Help 1.31]
> 
> Regards,
> Hedley
> 
> --
> Hedley Finger
> MYOB Australia Pty Ltd  <http://www.myob.com.au>
> P.O. box 371   Blackburn VIC 3130   Australia
> 12 Wesley Court   Tally Ho Business Park   East Burwood 3151   Australia
> Tel. +61 3 9222 9992 x 7421  Fax. +61 3 9222 9880  Mob. +61 412 461 558
> <mailto:hedley.finger@xxxxxxxx>
> 
> **************************************************
> To post a message to austechwriter, send the message to 
> austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> To subscribe to austechwriter, send a message to 
> austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "subscribe" in the Subject field.
> 
> To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 
> "unsubscribe" in the Subject field.
> 
> To search the austechwriter archives, go to 
> www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter
> 
> To contact the list administrator, send a message to 
> austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> **************************************************


**************************************************
To post a message to austechwriter, send the message to 
austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To subscribe to austechwriter, send a message to 
austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "subscribe" in the Subject field.

To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 
"unsubscribe" in the Subject field.

To search the austechwriter archives, go to 
www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter

To contact the list administrator, send a message to 
austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************

Other related posts: