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.
Subject:FrameMaker versus PageMaker From:"USA::MU17692" <MU17692%USA -dot- decnet -at- USAV01 -dot- GLAXO -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 17 Jan 1995 10:03:00 EST
Shelly LaRock wrote
>How many of you out there in techwhirler land use
>QuarkXPress? Although I know Frame and PageMaker
>very well, I prefer Quark, and it seems to handle
>larger docs (about 100 pgs) pretty well.
100 pages does not qualify as large, unless, perhaps
the document is crammed with bitmaps. When I worked
at Northern Telecom, we had manuals as large as
20,000 pages. I admit, 20,000 pages was the upper
limit, but our user documentation probably
averaged about 1200 pages per manual.
BTW, we used Interleaf to handle these humongous
documents. Interleaf uses LISP (an AI language) for
macro creation. What lanaguage does FrameMaker use?
-Mike Uhl (uhl~m -at- glaxo -dot- com)
Glaxo Inc. Research Institute
Research Triangle Park, NC
