scriptorium
The State of Structure
Sarah O’Keefe STC 2009, Atlanta
scriptorium
Structured authoringA publishing workflow that lets you define and automatically enforce consistent organization of information; implementations are generally based on Extensible Markup Language (XML).
scriptorium
Background Ƿ Survey conducted in January and February 2009
Ƿ More than 600 responses Ƿ Participants recruited via our customer lists and thecontentwrangler.com
scriptorium
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Do not plan to implement.
Undecided.
Eventually.
Plan to start in 2011 or later.
Plan to start in 2010.
Will begin this year.
Currently implementing. 13.5%
8.9%
9.4%
21.1%
16.2%
1.0%
0.6%
29.2%Have implemented.
Momentum for structured authoring
scriptorium
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
FuturePresentPast
Cost/effort
Personalization
Compliance
Info exchange
Localization
Reuse
Consistency
Most critical Not important
Why structure?
scriptorium
DITA versus non-DITA Ƿ DITA implementers care (relatively) more about localization, cost/effort, and information
Ƿ Most critical for DITA: reuse Ƿ Most critical for non-DITA: consistency
scriptorium
Just say no to structure Ƿ 16 percent said No. Never. Nuh-uh. Ƿ Of those, 67 percent cited cost and time of implementation.
Ƿ Other reasons: “staff will not adjust” (30+ percent)
Ƿ Small writing groups, small content set, lack of control, management sees no value, current tools work
scriptorium
Did it work? Yes.
Factor Ranked 1 or 2 Achieved byContent reuse 60.7% 86.0%
Consistency of documents 59.7% 91.5%
Cost/effort of developing content
28.2% 70.5%
Localization costs 25.2% 38.8%
Information exchange 11.2% 45.7%
Personalization/customization of content
15.4% 38.8%
Compliance with regulatory requirements
9.4% 21.7%
scriptorium
DITA dominates structure adoption.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
FuturePresentPast
Author-it
Other
Custom-developed
S1000D
Military standard
ATA
DITA
DocBook
Percent
scriptorium
DITA: Free but not cheap Ƿ Past implementers: same cost as other structures
Ƿ Present implementers: DITA implementation is more expensive than other structures
Ƿ Future implementers: estimate DITA at significantly lower cost than other structures.
scriptorium
DITA cost factors (not survey data) Ƿ Specialization Ƿ Output requirements beyond Open Toolkit (especially web-based help)
Ƿ Complex formatting in PDF Ƿ Legacy documentation Ƿ Large number of contributors
scriptorium
Wishful thinking?
0
20
40
60
80
100
Outside resourcesMostly outsideMostly employeesEmployees
50+ ppl16–50 ppl.
6–15 ppl.2–5 ppl.
1 person50+ ppl.
16–50 ppl.6–15 ppl.
2–5 ppl.1 person
50+ ppl.16–50 ppl.
6–15 ppl.2–5 ppl.
1 person
Perc
enta
ge
Past Present Future
scriptorium
Authoring tools Ƿ Winners: Arbortext, structured FrameMaker, XMetaL
Ƿ Surprises: oXygen, Flare
scriptorium
Market share
Tool By implementation By seatsArbortext 10% 15%
oXygen 18% 18%
Structured FrameMaker
35% 23%
XMetaL 37% 44%
scriptorium
Change management Ƿ Over 30 percent of non-implementers said, “Staff will not adjust.”
Ƿ Nearly 30 percent of past implementers had “some” or “a lot” of turnover.
Ƿ Nearly 20 percent of current implementers had “some or “a lot” of turnover.
scriptorium
“What was your biggest mistake?” Ƿ “Underestimated” Ƿ “Failure to plan” Ƿ “Insufficient analysis” Ƿ 37 percent cited project management problems, double the number of any other issue.
scriptorium
How to improve outcomes? Private training.
Ƿ Private, customized training increases implementation success.
Ƿ But…it also correlates with change resistance!
scriptorium
Recommendations Ƿ Planning! Ƿ Assess motivation Ƿ Provide training and education Ƿ Manage the development process Ƿ Address content migration Ƿ Choose tools and technologies wisely
scriptorium
Questions?
scriptorium
Contact information Ƿ Sarah O’Keefe Ƿ Scriptorium Publishing Ƿ www.scriptorium.com Ƿ [email protected]
Ƿ Scriptorium is exhibiting; stop by and visit us.
Top Related