Re: Word Maven

[Mike Bygrave <bygravem -at- INTUITIVE -dot- CO -dot- UK>]

You can't cross-reference properly with a multi-file project though.

Bit of a bummer that.

Cheers,
Max

Mike Bygrave (bygravem -at- intuitive -dot- co -dot- uk)
"1966 was a great year for English football - Cantona was born"
"I like deadlines.  I like the whooshing sound they make as they
fly by." - Douglas Adams


----------
From:   Phil Atkinson[SMTP:phila -at- INTUITIVE -dot- CO -dot- UK]
Sent:   12 June 1997 10:17
To:     TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
Subject:        Re: Word Maven

I feel for you mate. You've obviously been there and back again - several times. Welcome to the club.

PS  I agree completely with your solution to large documents in Word. It's the only way.

----------
From:   Bill DuBay[SMTP:bill_dubay -at- PHOENIX -dot- COM]
Sent:   11 June 1997 19:08
To:     TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
Subject:        Word Maven

I've been stuck in Word since Jesus. I maintain a 400-page reference manual
in Word and I dread the job of converting to Framemaker or Pagemaker.
Indexing, cross-referencing, and TOCs practically do themselves with a select
all and <F9>. The biggest pain is, how shall I say it, page sequencing.
Before updating the fields, I have to go through the whole doc and "keep with
next" on elements that love to dismember themselves  (straddle?) between
pages.
Over the years, I have learned to tame Word for large docs by:
  1. Limit the number of styles used to 10 or less. Delete all unused styles.
  2. Never use Master documents. I could never get it to work. It is the
biggest pain. I  develop a chapter as a separate, stand-alone doc, so I can
test the TOC and index as a separate unit. (The marketing people also like
the stand-alone docs. ) When tested and ready, I simply copy the modified or
new chapter into the large doc.
  3. Develop all graphics in another application. Link them. Do not save them
with the document.
  4. Word can never have too much memory. It knows not the meaning of garbage
collection.

Bill DuBay
Technical Writer
Phoenix Technologies Ltd.
email: bill_dubay -at- phoenix -dot- com
(714)790-2049 FAX: (714)790-2001
http://www.phoenix.com
-------------
Original Text
From: "Ivie, Guy" <GuyI -at- CORPMAIL -dot- FOLLETT -dot- COM>, on 6/11/97 11:37 AM:
Kathleen,

Generally speaking, I don't find PageMaker to be a good tool for manuals
of any length, particularly if they will be updated on a regular basis.
For the last (harrumph!) number of years, I've used Word exclusively for
manuals. All the documents are based on templates that were designed by
me or by a graphic artist. I took the designs and created the actual Word
templates. The rest of the writers use the template and its associated
styles to turn out documents without worrying about page layout.

If you're working with exceptionally long documents, you may find that
FrameMaker suits your needs better than Word. Most people on this list
seem to be Frame mavens; I haven't found the need for that much
horsepower yet.

Document maintenance can be a big issue in PageMaker. I'm sure someone
out there will be happy to disagree with me on this, but that's been my
experience with training manuals. I like --and use-- PM for brochures,
quick-ref cards, newsletters, magazines... anything that has a heavy mix
of objects (text or graphic) that are placed on pages in slick, varied
layouts. But for software user manuals, training manuals, etc., I find
Word documents easier to work with and easier to maintain later.

As for turning over raw text to the graphic arts dept. for production...
this is starting to sound like an author dealing with a publishing
company, not a technical documentation project. Your points are right on
target. If the company wants a unified look, let the graphics dept.
design it for you. Reproduce that look in a template for whatever tool
you use. Then keep the documents coming off your desk as finished
products. The "look" will be right, but you'll still have the freedom to
make last minute changes with a minimum of fuss and review time.

My opinions... your mileage may vary.

Guy Ivie
givie -at- earthlink -dot- net (personal)
GuyI -at- corpmail -dot- follett -dot- com (work)

 TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html

 TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html

 TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html

 TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html