Easier to convert to Structured or start there?

[Avionica]

Hello,

I am an experienced writer who is new to Structured. I have created plenty of Unstructured templates and have lots of SGML authoring experience. I have a new job in a small company where I am the only writer, my new boss is very insistent about my getting started with Frame 9 to start updating their manuals. They were using an expensive plug-in which introduced lots of system errors so they stopped using it. So the first thing I need to do is create a template. Also, I need to offer an XML output eventually but not right now.

My question is, would it be easier to do the next revision in Unstructured, which I am familiar with and could create right now, then convert the template to Structured at a later date? Or should I bite the bullet and skip the Unstructured and go straight to Structured? I have seen articles that say Unstructured to Structured conversion is easier than Structured from scratch - that much of the work I did for Unstructured would not be lost. By the way I won't be getting any Structured training, like I said it's a small company. So I'm on my own here, please help!

[Van Kurtz · Accepted solution]

If the company needs updates now, I would work in unstructured to get them finished. Going to structured documents involves the conversion of the unstructured ones to structured. SO, anything you do now in the unstructured documents will still be there when you are ready to convert to structured. The FORMATTING of structured documents can be made to be the same as the unstructured ones, so the user will likely not notice the difference.

The conversion to structured requires more than simply doing the conversion. You need a target structure to do the conversion, and creating that structure takes time. OR you can use a standard structure, such as DITA or DocBook instead.

I suggest you begin reading the Structured Applications Developers Guide that ships with FrameMaker or can be downloaded from Adobe.com

Van

[ScottPrentice]

Sorry, but any article that says that the conversion from unstructured to structured is easier than writing in an existing structured model, is sorely mistaken. To convert requires that you create or obtain the target model (structure applications, etc.), then actually do the conversion (which is never easy). To write new content in a structured model just requires the first step .. then you're good to go.

Note that there are two forms of structured authoring in FM .. binary or XML/SGML. You can maintain your source files as binary "FM" files that are structured, and you gain the efficiency of working in an environment that guides you and provides provides additional features over what you get with unstructured. Or, you can maintain your source files as XML or SGML (DocBook and DITA being two popular models). When you open an XML/SGML file in Frame, it functions the same as if it were sourced as a FM binary file, but each time you save it's written back to the XML or SGML file. Each method has its pros and cons, but the conversion process will differ depending on which you choose.

When moving to "structured" authoring, you need to choose a data model (DocBook, DITA, custom?) and decide on how the source files are maintained (FM or XML) .. but in order to choose those things you should have a good idea as to how exactly you expect to benefit from this move. The bottom line is to not rush into it and learn all you can about what you're planning to do before going there.

Cheers!

...scott

[Avionica]

Thanks Van and Scott. Since my primary output format will be .pdf I will probably maintain .fm files. We want to offer an .xml output for our customers who request it but so far none of them have.

One possible advantage to creating an Unstructured template (for now) is the breathing room I will get from my boss so I can learn Structured at my own pace. And this will also give me the familiarity with my new manuals that will allow me to create the appropriate structure when the time comes. I must concur with other contributors to this site that there is a surprising lack of "starter" information about Structured.

I am just beginning to discover this site and wanted to say how helpful all the contributors are, especially the ones that answer MY questions!

[jim_monaco]

I’m with Scott – if your intention is to go structured, then do it from the beginning. You can clearly create data in your unstructured document that cannot be mapped to a structured equivalent – that may necessitate rewriting content at a later date in order to map to a rigorous structure. That likely would affect the output that end users see. As others have said, doing a structure from scratch can be daunting – it is better to start from some existing structure – perhaps a standard like DocBook or DITA depending on your content.

People often underestimate the pain associated with migrating content from unstructured to structured…

Jim

Jim Monaco

Solution Architect: Aerospace

[ScottPrentice]

I think that structured authoring (and in particular XML) can provide some nice advantages, but it is a real change from what you're used to. The more time you can spend in learning and exploring the options, the better off you'll be.

Good luck!

...scott

[Russ Ward]

Avionica,

I generally agree with the comments so far. One thing I'd like to add... the basic point here is that structured documents contain an additional level of metadata (or "intelligence") that surrounds your content. When you author directly in a structured environment, you add that intelligence piece by piece, as you are the human who has it natively. With a good structure definition, this process is generally intuitive and no more effort than unstructured authoring (and often less effort!). However, when you try to convert later, you are effectively trying to supplement all that intelligence at once, which can be a big job. The natural inclination is to try automation; however, such automation is necessarily based on assumptions and hardly ever comes out perfect, requiring manual intervention anyway.

Bottom line, the sooner you start, the better.

Russ

[Avionica]

Thanks to all for your thoughtful and insightful comments. In a perfect world I would start with Structured after extensive training and practice. But the more I know about Structured the more I realize I do not know. I cannot provide an assurance to my employer concerning the quality or schedule of my product if I start with Structured because it appears my learning curve is too unpredictable. So I will do it the old-fashioned way (Unstructured) until I learn to create and apply a custom EDD. In the meantime I will consult this site often to absorb every tidbit of knowledge you guys have to offer. Thanks again!