RE: FrameMaker 6.1 to 5.5

[Marguerite Krupp <mkrupp -at- cisco -dot- com>]

Remember, though, that if you work with other writers and need to share
files (even just as email attachments or common files left on servers for
review), you really all need to agree on the version of Frame that you'll
use for these files. I dropped back from Frame 6.0 (reluctantly) because
corporately we'd standardized on 5.5.6 (and weren't going to upgrade). While
I could read their files just fine with 6.0, they couldn't read mine without
going through mif, and this was just too much of a pain. In addition, I
would eventually have to convert back to 5.5.6 for publishing through the
corporate "workflow." Too many potential gotchas in an already tenuous
process, IMHO.

So, bottom line, multiply the cost of the upgrade by the number of writers,
or forget about upgrading just one or two people.

Marguerite

___________________________
Pray for Peace.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Announcing new options for IPCC 01, October 24-27 in Santa Fe,
New Mexico: attend the entire event or select a single day.  
For details and online registration, visit http://ieeepcs.org/2001

  Your monthly sponsorship message here reaches more than
  5000 technical writers, providing 2,500,000+ monthly impressions.
  Contact Eric (ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com) for details and availability.

---
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.