Comments on: A Technical Writing Suite From Adobe? http://thecontentwrangler.com/2006/04/24/a_technical_writing_suite_from_adobe/ Content is a business asset worthy of being managed Tue, 16 Mar 2010 01:29:18 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: Glenn Emerson http://thecontentwrangler.com/2006/04/24/a_technical_writing_suite_from_adobe/comment-page-1/#comment-5 Glenn Emerson Mon, 01 May 2006 23:05:12 +0000 http://localhost:8888/ee/?p=754#comment-5 <p>Sounds a bit absurd to picture RoboHelp displacing Webworks for Frame single sourcing from Frame. While FrameMaker for structured authoring reduces (but doesn’t eliminate) the need for a tool like Webworks, certainly RoboHelp doesn’t offer any advantage or reason to choose it as part of a single-source strategy. Not without some kind of major code overhaul by Adobe. </p> <p> Developers who use RoboHelp tend to create totally separate content databases for help and printed documentation. This is inefficient and wasteful. It’s a neat tool for creating boutique help systems (though I’ve always preferred real web development apps), but nothing more. <br /> </p> Sounds a bit absurd to picture RoboHelp displacing Webworks for Frame single sourcing from Frame. While FrameMaker for structured authoring reduces (but doesn’t eliminate) the need for a tool like Webworks, certainly RoboHelp doesn’t offer any advantage or reason to choose it as part of a single-source strategy. Not without some kind of major code overhaul by Adobe.

Developers who use RoboHelp tend to create totally separate content databases for help and printed documentation. This is inefficient and wasteful. It’s a neat tool for creating boutique help systems (though I’ve always preferred real web development apps), but nothing more.

]]>