TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
> That line by van Herwijnen makes me see red. But it's typical of this
> peculiar and extremely arrogant top-down approach by SGML's designers.
Again, I suspect that quote was misread, because it was out of
context. I suspect that he was referring in general to a discordant
array of documents in widely varying formats, all coming from the same
company. I also point that he was talking about SMEs, not about tech
writers.
> I work with an SGML system here are EJV Partners that I'm trying to
> get ditched. The SGML coding interferes with the intellectual work by
> making you focus again and again on the process of entering
> text--whenever you make a coding mistake, in other words, it beeps at
> you and interrupts your thought processes over and over and over...
Ugh, ugh, ugh. Too many context switches, too much cognitive
load and task juggling added to the already intense task of writing
well.
> One of the SGML ideas--having a standard text exchange method--is
> laudable. (But why not use Postscript?
Because that's going backwards. Postscript is *not* designed
be a format for universal exchange between document applications.
It's designed to be a universal display protocol.
> Why not use a program like Interleaf's WorldView or Framemaker 4
> that accepts text in dozens of formats and exports in same?)
How much import/export work have you had to do with those
products? :-) More to the point, proprietary formats make it
difficult, if not impossible, for industry-wide standards to arise.
And the conversion application will always be second priority to
FrameMaker or Interleaf, in the development cycle, meaning development
of filters will lag behind the product. Not to mention immense
duplication of effort with each application developer having to do the
job over and over again, effort that I'd rather see invested in
improving the interface or making the product more reliable.
> But until SGML coding is built into all word-processors--until tech
> writers wrest the standards-making process away from these bizarre
> SGML power trippers!
You're missing the point, because that is EXACTLY what the
SGML power trippers want to see happen - they want to see it become
standard, they want to see it built into all word-processors. When
that happens, you won't have to worry about it at all, you'll just
use it, and you'll chuckle and shake your head at all the old timers
who remember a time when you had to jump through hoops to get your
ventura document over to FrameMaker.
