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:Re: Frame Help vs. others From:Jan SHELTON <jan_shelton -at- SDT -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 11 Jul 1995 11:06:49 CST
I haven't yet used FM for generating help files because it is
*excruciatingly* cumbersome. We are working around that limitation by
exporting to RTF and opening in WinWord, then using RoboHelp to
generate .HLP files. We have to go an extra step to get the files to
UNIX, but that's not your situation). Even though it is cumbersome to
export to RTF and use another platform to code the help, it still is
faster than using markers in FrameMaker.
Jan Shelton
SABRE Decision Technologies
jan_shelton -at- sdt -dot- com
______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: Frame Help vs. others
Author: atc -at- corte-madera -dot- geoquest -dot- slb -dot- com (Arthur Comings) at
SMTPLINK-GW
Date: 7/10/95 10:00 AM
I'm interviewing for a job where they intend to produce some hard-copy
doc in Frame (which I'm comfortable with), but then have someone else
do on-line Help in RoboHelp or Doc-to-Help with *Word*.
This surprises me, and isn't the way I would go; am I missing
something? Are those various other Help tools (which I've browsed at a
workshop or two) somehow better than Frame? This would be for Windows,
incidentally -- maybe that's significant.
Thanks
Arthur Comings
GeoQuest
Corte Madera, California
atc -at- corte-madera -dot- geoquest -dot- slb -dot- com
