hallett@gemed (Jeff Hallett x5163 ) (10/19/89)
This message is aimed at people who do multiauthor, long documents
using Word 4.0 or people who have intimate knowledge of future updates
to FullWrite Professional.
Here's the idea. We have our group divided into teams. These teams
(~<12) need to generate documentation. I want to get us to use Macs.
However, the major driving requirement to which I cannot get a firm
answer is how well Word or future FullWrite versions will allow
multiple writers to integrate their work.
The ideal situation is like Interleaf's "book" folder. Basically, the
"book" folder is created. One defines "catalogs" within the books to
act as Word-like style sheets (no templates though). Any styles
defined in the catalogs are available to all members of the book. Any
document created/pasted into the book folder has immediate access to
these styles as well as all autonumbered elements (pages, chapter
headings, footnotes, etc) as needed. This means that pages are
automatically updated, blank pages are inserted to enforce
double-sided requirements and so on.
I know that Word 3.02 allowed users to "link" documents together so
that pages could be automatically updated, but didn't allow for
composite tables of contents or indexes or footnotes (I think). Is
Word 4.0 smarter about any of these things? Will FullWrite be
smarter?
At the Expo, a couple of us spoke to an Ashton-Tate representative
about these issues. He was tremendously clueless as is most
Ashton-Tate tech and customer support. The last time I tried to call
to report a bug or make a suggestion, I was refused access because my
support period had elapsed (bozos). If anyone has someone's ear
there, this would be a good feature for a future release.
I suggest something like Interleaf's method except without the folder.
A user, in FullWrite, could ask to create a book. The book is
initially empty. Users then select documents using the SFGetFile box
to add to the book. Users can change the document order in the book
by dragging names around (like changing loading order in INITPicker).
Users could also add style sheets to the book. When the book is
opened or printed, FullWrite just visits each document in order and
updates the page numbers, footnotes and any other autonumbering
references (xrefs would be the tricky part). Books may have templates
associated with them too.
Howzat sound? Comments, discussions?
--
Jeffrey A. Hallett, PET Software Engineering
GE Medical Systems, W641, PO Box 414, Milwaukee, WI 53201
(414) 548-5163 : EMAIL - hallett@gemed.ge.com
"Your logic was impeccable Captain. We are in grave danger."kehr@felix.UUCP (Shirley Kehr) (10/20/89)
In article <1256@mrsvr.UUCP> hallett@gemed.ge.com (Jeff Hallett x5163 ) writes:
<However, the major driving requirement to which I cannot get a firm
<answer is how well Word or future FullWrite versions will allow
<multiple writers to integrate their work.
What I've done is create a style guide that illustrates the required styles.
I pass this document around and other authors read in the styles. As a side
benefit, they have the text and pictures in the style guide on line. If I
don't remember how we decided to do something, I just open the style guide
as another window beside the document I'm working on.
The only catch is that you have to make sure everyone gets a new copy of
the style guide when you change it.
As for the document and section setups, all they have to do is use the
style guide's setup as a shell to start a new document. Make a copy of
the style guide and delete all of its text. Then just start entering text.
Usually we update existing manuals, so this situation doesn't occur a lot.
<I know that Word 3.02 allowed users to "link" documents together so
<that pages could be automatically updated, but didn't allow for
<composite tables of contents or indexes or footnotes (I think). Is
<Word 4.0 smarter about any of these things? Will FullWrite be
<smarter?
The only reason you couldn't do a practical index of linked documents before
was because of a hard coded limit on the edit buffer. It filled up long
before your index was compiled. Version 4.0 removed that limit (or increased
its size?). It is no longer a problem. I was at the end of a manual with
20-some chapters and linked them to create the indexes I needed. It saved
me hours of hand formatting. The only caveat is that you need to use
sequential page numbering instead of chapter-page no. combinations like
1-1, 2-5, etc.
Shirley Kehr