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:Interleaf From:Rebecca Carr <rebecca -at- WHITE -dot- SC -dot- TI -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 18 Nov 1997 11:54:39 -0600
Jonathan:
Interleaf is powerful and does everything well. Our graphics people love
it. It handles really large documents (700-1000 pages) very well and I
prefer it over FrameMaker for these. Also, the equation package is very
useful and easier to master than FrameMaker IMO.
It is still somewhat of a pain to convert/import but that is much
improved recently with a better filter package.
I like indexing in Interleaf and it formats well for our style. Once you
get the template catalog designed the way you want it, do a few search
and replace, and you are finished. Of course, you will still do some
content editing after that.
Since I am a "mouser" I don't have a problem with "mouse intensive".
I started with Interleaf years ago and when I learned FrameMaker, it
seemed totally different with a different interface; but once I caught
on...no problem. Interleaf 6 is trying a new approach similar to WORD
and FrameMaker, but I don't like it so far...except for the filtering
capabilities. And our graphics people say that Interleaf 6 graphics
is NOT as good as Interleaf 5, which they still prefer to use. So, I
guess time will tell with Interleaf 6.
Interleaf is still more expensive than FrameMaker and that is usually a
big concern.
