Re: Go Completely "On-line"

[Robin McCloud <RMcCloud -at- TFMG -dot- COM>]

I think both HTML and PDF formats are valid. What you use depends on what
type of product you want for your clients, what kind of files you start out
with, and what you want to create from those files.

My department converted a 15-volume documentation set (lovingly known as the
Encyclopedia Titanica by some of our clients) from MS Word files to PDF. Our
Customer Support Department appreciates the CD, because now they can search
for topics using Acrobat's search function. Some clients still call Customer
Support for help, of course, but the help desk can now function more
efficiently.

When we first converted to PDF, Customer Support received calls about the
CD, questioning how to install Acrobat Reader, and how to read the files on
the CD. That was a problem we had not anticipated, but we've nipped that
problem in the bud by providing directions on the inside cover of the CD,
and providing a hardcopy CD User Manual.

When we started the project, the document source files were in MS Word, but
were not automated at all - no styles, no pagination, no hyperlinks, no
nothing. The indices and tables of contents were all created by hand, as
were the headings, headers and footers, and page numbers.  I think this was
partially due to the fact that the documents were first created in WordStar
or some other program in VMS or another character-based system, and did not
convert well to MS Word. I tried converting the files to HTML and ended up
with an assortment of unusable files. The only way we could convert the
documentation to HTML would be if we went back into the MS Word files and
formatted everything - a big waste of time for legacy documentation that was
eventually going to be replaced.

Hence, we decided to go with PDF because of the situation in which we found
ourselves - compressed schedule, kludgy files. We've since added many more
files to our CD, linking to the original legacy documentation, and so far,
clients have been happy with the results.

HTML is great when you are creating new documentation from the get-go and
don't need to distribute a "regular" manual. If you put a document in HTML,
you have to stay away from having all the information in one HTML file, like
I've seen some of our programmers do with their design documents. Web design
eschews documents that scroll ... and scroll ... and scroll ... but if you
put the information in separate files, continuity is more difficult when you
try to print the files. You also have to have a separate search engine in
order to search for topics in HTML files.

PDF, OTOH, converts existing documents with relative ease. PDF is great for
clients that are used to printed manuals since the files give the look and
feel of a printed manual, with the added capability of having hyperlinks. If
you are providing the documents online and for print, this option works
better. Acrobat Catalog does create a word index for every PDF file you
create. The search function is limited, but works well for our purposes.

A comment from one of our field engineers, which he shared with me while we
were discussing online information on the Internet:

I have one comment, in the form of a quote from Hypertext pioneer Neil
Larsen:

http://maxthink.com/seminar/max11.html
<http://maxthink.com/seminar/max11.html>   In this audio clip he argues
several reasons why word search is a poor approach to conveying knowledge.

(This requires a sound card and Real Player *. Download Real Player * from
his site or from www.hotfiles.com <http://www.hotfiles.com>  )

Robin Mc2 (McCloud McDonald)
Sr. Technical Communicator
Information Development
The FAST Management Group, Inc.
Redmond WA
 <http://www.tfmg.com> www.tfmg.com