Amy,
I don't know what experience you have in working with XML, structured documents, EDDs, conversion tables, read/write rules, application definition files, and the other components of a FrameMaker structure application. You may not need them all. Especially if you are new to structure in general, I recommend that you don't try to learn everything at once. Start with something you do need--a structured template and an EDD and branch out to other components as you need them. It is always tempting to start by converting legacy documents. If your schedule permits, I recommend first setting up a structured template that you can use to experiment with structured documents. If you start with the conversion table, you may wind up with a structure that is optimized for adding structure to existing material rather than editing it once it's been structured.
As far as the question of whether to define your own structure or use an existing one, I do not agree with the logic that using an existing model (such as DITA) gets you started earlier and saves you analysis time. Structure is all about organizing content, that is, organizing ideas and your project will provide the most benefit if you take time for planning at the beginning. That analysis might take the form of designing your own structure; it may take the form of figuring out how the elements and attributes defined in an existing model map into your own content. Remember that the industry-standard models are designed to apply to the documentation needs at many companies. They often make great examples for preliminary study, but they tend to be huge and much more complex than you may need. If you decide to go that route, strongly consider using a subset or specialization of the original model.
Using a large tag set off the shelf is parallel to using a word processor without a style sheet. If the model was designed to let writers create almost anything, the model won't help writers create documents that conform to their own company's conventions. For example, one benefit of FrameMaker structured editing as compared to unstructured editing is that the context-sensitive available elements listed in the structured Element Catalog show only elements the writer is likely to need at the current point in the document. In contrast, the Paragraph and Character Catalogs show all defined catalog entries. Thus, if certain formats are only available within front matter or only for a title at the beginning of a larger unit, the format catalogs still show them everywhere. Suppose you start with a model that allows dozens of inline elements within a paragraph (emphasis, foreign phrase, part number, keyword, quotation, and so forth). If writers at your organization never use more than five of the inline elements, set up your application so that those five are the only ones listed.
One of DITA's original design goals was to reduce the overhead that large companies like IBM required to publish documentation from new partners. The only way that goal could be achieved was with permissive rules for what's allowed where. Yes, DITA can be customized to support more stringent rules. Learning how to do so is part of the cost of using DITA. That expense may be worth it, but recognize it is there.
The dividing line between a custom structure and a customization of one that is widely available may be blurry. My mother once had a cookbook with a recipe that concluded something like "bake for 20 minutes, or more, or less, it all depends." Designing a structured environment is similar. It all depends.
--Lynne
1 Correct answer
21
Replies
AdChoices