Re: More single-sourcing brouhaha (however you spell that)

[Sean Brierley <seanb_us -at- yahoo -dot- com>]

I appreciate what the original author of the article
on "D-I-Y Single Sourcing" did. I said it must have
been a cool project, or words to that effect.

But, after skimming the rebuttals to the letter to the
editor, as a blueprint for doing your own single
sourcing, the approach seems off-base.

The original author's premise for taking the time to
create his own solution is flawed (leaving alone the
three months taken to make FM structured, for whatever
inherent benefits); his premise is that since WWP
Standard Edition couldn't do the job, he had to make
his own. But, WWP Pro or WWP 2003 can do what he
wanted. WWP Pro or 2003 were the tools that should
have been considered, not the free HTML export filter
that ships with FrameMaker.

A related thought is that WWP 2003 and such tools are
too expensive. IMHO, that analysis is flawed and it
cost time, money, and reliability. For example, let's
say your time is worth $25/hour. At $850 for Windows,
WWP 2003 has paid for itself by the time you save 34
hours (okay, add tax ;?). That is, WWP 2003 can pay
for itself easily in the first project, if not the
first week. (And, there are other such tools.)

Moreover, let's say you leave the company, get laid
off, etc. WWP 2003 is well supported. How well
supported is the D-I-Y project, with the original
author and creator gone?

Then, the original author explains that he is not
single sourcing, but reusing content and that reuse is
becoming more like single sourcing as the days and
projects pass ....

Okay, again, the project sounds cool. The skills used
and developed sound great. And, the support of the
employer for this D-I-Y approach and subsequent
maintenance is great! I wish more employers supported
their technical writers that way.

But, the reality is, that such an approach costs the
employer time, money, and potentially accuracy.
Moreover, I would claim that such an article scares
more people about single sourcing because it makes
single sourcing seem technically difficult and time
consuming, and not at all something that you can do
yourself. The reality is, for most typical single
sourcing needs, a tool has already been created that
does the job--I pick on WWP 2003, but there are
others. And, those tools are not expensive if you look
beyond the initial outlay of cash . . . they pay for
themselves in reliable, repeatable, speed and
efficiency quite quickly.

Just food for thought.

Cheers,

Sean

--- kcronin -at- daleen -dot- com wrote:

> A couple months back, an Intercom article on
> single-sourcing drew a lot of
> criticism on this board. Well, techwhirlers weren't
> the only ones taking
> umbrage with the article - there were two letters
> published in the latest
> Intercom, both attacking the piece. The author wrote
> a brief response in
> this issue, then directed readers to this site for
> more of his take on the
> issue: http://www.mak.com/doc/diyssrebuttal.htm

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

ROBOHELP FOR FRAMEMAKER TRIAL NOW AVAILABLE!

RoboHelp for FrameMaker is a NEW online publishing tool for FrameMaker that
lets you easily single-source content to online Help, intranet, and Web.  
The interface is designed for FrameMaker users, so there is little or no
learning curve and no macro language required! Call 800-718-4407 for 
competitive pricing or download a trial at: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l4

---
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.