Re: WWP vs. mif2go

[Kathy McCord <kmccord@xxxxxxx>]

framers...

i do not have experience with MIF2GO, but have worked with WWP for many years
(since 3.08, back in 1997 i think), so can give my biased answers about WWP.

8o)


> From: "Thomas Michanek" <thomas.michanek@iar.se>
> To: <framers@omsys.com>
> Subject: WWP vs. mif2go
> Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 12:30:11 +0200
> 
> I guess this has been asked before, but still:
> 
> We want to produce online help from FrameMaker manuals
> for our Windows software products; either in WinHelp,
> Microsoft HTML Help, or perhaps "straight" HTML format.
> Has anyone experience of both WebWorks Publisher (Pro)
> and Omni System's MIF2GO for these purposes?
> I'm looking for detailed comparisons, evaluations,
> white papers, endorsements, warnings, etc.
> 
> My limited understanding is something like this:
> 


WWP is expensive; 

	this is probably true (i think it's ~$1200 US for a single license),
	but if it is a tool you will use over and over, is that really a
	limiting factor?


takes a lot of computer resources;

	my experience is with using WWP on UNIX; others in my company have
	used it on windows.  under certain circumstances it is slow on 
	windows (but not always).  again, if it does the job, does this 
	need to be a limiting factor?
	

is integrated with FM, 

	not really.  when you install WWP, there is a modification made to the 
	FM "apiclients" file.  you need to start FM, then start WWP.  


has a nice GUI; 

	yes, though there are a few aspects of it that are more klunky than
	necessary.  my biggest complaint with WW2000 is that it goes through and
	reads every single Frame file in the project at very inopportune moments
	(i.e., you just made a single change and don't really want to wait 90
	seconds while it goes and processes that change for every file).  there
	are ways to work around this, such as have a "dummy" project with only a
	couple of files in it, in which you do your development/experimentation.
	

is very complex with a high learning curve; 

	i look at this as one of those "intellectual investment" things: it has a
	lot of power, a lot of functionality, and yes, you need to spend some time
	learning how to use those features if you want to have full control over 
	your highly customizable output.  but is traversing that learning curve
	considered to be wasted time?  i don't think so.  once you've learned it,
	you now have a very powerful tool at your disposable for all future 
	projects.  it also behooves you to have a good knowledge of HTML and, if
	you plan to use CSS files, know your CSS.  


can be customized to do anything you want but requires you to learn a 
macro language; 

	i disagree.  there are many things you *can* do with the WWP macro language,
	but you are not required to do them.  i have avoided the macro language, and
	have set up my conversions to be HTML 3.2 compliant (not HTML 4.0...).
	
	imho, part of the trick is to make sure you have a logical and under-control
	framemaker process: use pgf styles and char formats; do not use overrides;
	make intelligent use of variables and conditions, and so on.  
	
	if your framemaker process is well-defined (and adhered to), you will be able 
	to obtain reasonable conversions using WWP.

	
supports lots of output formats, but difficult to get usable output 
"out-of-the-box". 

	my experience is that the out-of-the-box outputs are good starting points;
	i *like* to be able to modify the outputs to meet the needs of my project,
	because then i have creative control over the work i am producing.  with
	wwp, i am able to make all the necessary modifications.  only extremely
	rarely have i run into something where i have had to compromise because of 
	a limitation in the tool.  (and most of my compromises were because of
	problems with my chosen output, javahelp, rather than with wwp per se.)
	
	
It comes with a comprehensive manual; 

	yes, though you can't always find what you want/need in it.  but you can 
	always experiment to get what you want.
	

technical support is good but expensive, 

	tech support used to be good, back in their early days.  my more recent
	experience with TS (about 1 1/2 years ago) made me decide not to bother:
	it took them over three days to not solve my very simple problem, and 
	then they tried to charge for the time.  i figured it out myself: at 
	least they did reverse the charges when i protested.
	
	i did work with their template factory group last year and was quite
	satisfied with their work and willingness to cooperate.  (we contracted
	with them to convert one of our books -- 900+ pages -- to a javahelp
	system, because we were running out of time.  we were the typical night-
	mare customer to them, i'm sure -- late delivery, horribly tight dead-
	line (which we then kept slipping on our end), lots of requests for
	tweaks, last-minute changes and re-dos, but andrew van conas was very
	willing to work with us and we were essentially pleased with the results.)
	

but there are helpful and active user groups.

	yes: wwp-users@yahoogroups.com is very useful.

	
--- kmc


------------------------------------
K.A. McCord, Staff Technical Writer
kathy.mccord@windriver.com  
Vox: (831) 661-0246 x 229   
Fax: (831) 661-0159
------------------------------------



** To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@omsys.com **
** with "unsubscribe framers" (no quotes) in the body.   **