RE: Document Control Systems

["Fred Ridder" <docudoc -at- hotmail -dot- com>]

There are a lot of people doing some form of single sourcing (which
is a seriously overloaded term that can refer to a whole spectrum
of practices) without using XML or SGML.

For example, in our group we produce four different variants of
most of our publications (two operating systems x two platforms)
from the same set of unstructured FrameMaker files. Yes, we use
a CMS (Documentum with the recently discontinued FrameLink
interface) to help us manage everything and keep track of what
publicaiton uses what information modules.

Yes, we could do even more and with less effort if we were using
XML, and that is the migration we're working toward right now.
But it is certainly possible and practical to do single source
authoring and publishing using unstructured (non-XML) tools.

It may also be useful to draw some sort of distinction between
document management systems and content management systems,
although some systems can handle both types of usage models.
Documentum, for example, falls more under the former category.
It's very good for managing access to and delivery of finished
documents; it's less good for managing dozens or hundreds of
source components that are used to compose a final document.
And I've heard that it really shows its limitations when called
upon to manage a myriad of small, independent units of content
as is often the case when working in a structured environment.
For that application, you're usually better off opting for a CMS
that is specifically designed to manage an XML content repository.
Systems like Astoria, Idiom WorldServer, Vasont, and XyEnterprise
Content@, and some other that I can't remember right now.
What Clare seemed to be asking about was more on the document
management end of the spectrum, while Pamela's need seems to
be more on the source management side.

My opinions only; I don't speak for Intel
Fred Ridder
Intel
Parsippany, NJ