RE: Baiting for the single source rant

["Swallow, William" <WSwallow -at- courion -dot- com>]

<snip>I have been researching single sourcing for a few months now. But, I
am
under the impression that single sourcing was great if you wanted to nail
down a standard style between technical writers.  Single sourcing (SS)
locks in a style in order for the writers to concentrate more on content
instead of formatting, formatting, formatting.</snip>

No, that's from template/style adherence. Single-sourcing isn't a "do this"
or "buy this" thing. It's a way of approaching documentation. Most writers
approach documentation from a document (physical thing, whether it be paper,
stone, electrons, whatever) perspective. Single-sourcing starts with
information, not "procedures only", "chunks o' data", or what have you. Just
information. That information is then structured in a way that makes sense
for its intended use(s), whether that be procedure, prose, illustration...
The rest grows out from that.

<snip>Also, it depends on what tool(s) you are using for SS, you can
conditionalize certain text to appear only in printed documentation or
online help in Doc-to-Help and Author It.  When you generate the output
(printed and online), text that is designated as online help only will only
appear in the help and vice versa.  With Author It, you can do this with
topics or text inside the topics.</snip>

Here's where the single-source issue gets all jumbled up. The tool is a
tool. Nothing more. No one tool is better than another. It all depends on
what you need. I had one single-source scheme in place where we used
FrameMaker and WebWorks Publisher. I had another in place where we used
XML-tagged information with Access and a bit of SQL to compose the output.
The tool is based on need, and the need is based on the type of information
you need to deliver.

<snip>When I started working for my company six months ago, I presented the
problem of not having as much control over online help (we work mainly with
printed documentation, and just recently started generating online help for
our software).  I suggested that maybe separating online help from printed
documentation altogether would produce better quality; however, I was shot
down by a fellow technical writer - that in fact, had sold management on
Doc-to-Help awhile back.
It is very hard convincing them otherwise.  Currently, I am in favor of
using Author It instead of Doc-to-Help for our purposes so we can lock in a
standard style between all TWs. We have a lot of topics that are duplicated
from product to product, and we need more version/file control.</snip>

No one likes to abandon a decision, especially when it's been taken to
action. That's a generic battle I think most of us fight on a regular basis,
whether TW-centered or not. In your case, I'm not sure if the tool is the
issue. It sounds like your TWs need direction more than anything else.
There's no reason why style and template cannot be followed using
Doc-to-Help. Doc-to-Help sits atop Word, and Word is template-friendly (I
almost typed template-driven *g*). It won't matter if you go to AuthorIt,
RoboHelp, DreamWeaver, or Help-o-Matic10KPlusOffice; if your writers don't
make a conscious decision to follow a set style and adhere to a well-defined
template, your process is flawed. Imagine a longboat being manned without a
drum, a crew boat without a coxswain, an army without a general or even a
set of orders. You need some kind of infrastructure - not technology per se
- for everyone to follow, and someone to enforce it. I know I chose stronger
words and these will undoubtedly cause a stir ("we don't need a police
officer in our group!"), but that's the basic idea. Take it as it is and do
with it what you will.

***************** 
BILL SWALLOW 
Technical Writer 
C O U R I O N   C O R P O R A T I O N 
1881 Worcester Road 
Framingham, Mass.  01701 
T E L * 508-879-8400 x316 
F A X * 508-879-8500 
www.courion.com 
***************** 
THIS EMAIL CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
MEANT FOR THE INTENDED RECIPIENT ONLY. PLEASE
DELETE THIS IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED IT IN ERROR.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A landmark hotel, one of America's most beautiful cities, and 
three and a half days of immersion in the state of the art:
IPCC 01, Oct. 24-27 in Santa Fe.  http://ieeepcs.org/2001/

  +++  Miramo -- Database/XML publishing automation.  See us at  +++
  +++  Seybold SFO, Sept. 25-27, in the Adobe Partners Pavilion  +++
  +++ More info: http://www.axialinfo.com  http://www.miramo.com +++

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.