The state of structure, 2011

background image ﬂickr: thelastminute Sarah O’Keefe, Scriptorium PublishingMonday, May 9, 2011

❖ Everyone is muted except for the presenter ❖ Please ask your questions through the Questions area in the webcast interface ❖ The presentation is being recorded; attendees do not appear in the recording.Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ Founder and president, Scriptorium Publishing ❖ Content strategy for tech comm ❖ Interested in collision of content, publishing, and technologyMonday, May 9, 2011

❖ Survey conducted via web (surveymonkey.com) ❖ January and February 2011 ❖ Recruited participants through direct email, Twitter, blog posts, and word of mouth ❖ Approximately 200 completed survey ❖ Almost identical to 2009 surveyMonday, May 9, 2011

❖ A publishing workﬂow that lets you deﬁne and automatically enforce consistent organization of information; implementations are generally based on Extensible Markup Language (XML)Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ “Have you implemented structured authoring, or do you plan to do so?”Monday, May 9, 2011

Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ Have implemented ❖ 2009: 29% ❖ 2011: 42% ❖ Undecided ❖ 2009: 21% ❖ 2011: 10%Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ Choose the most important reason for moving to structure. ❖ Original survey included compliance and personalization, but those were the bottom two choices.Monday, May 9, 2011

Monday, May 9, 2011

not Monday, May 9, 2011

Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ “Doesn’t make sense in a single-author environment.” ❖ “The payoff just isn’t there.” ❖ “No compelling beneﬁts…”Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ “Too much change…” ❖ “Not even thinking inside the box, let alone outside” ❖ “Not sure how it will impact us.”Monday, May 9, 2011

Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ “Automated daily publishing” ❖ “Reduction of total content” ❖ “Step toward separating content from presentation” ❖ “Short time to provide more languages” ❖ “Easier workﬂow ❖ “Rebranding, variants”Monday, May 9, 2011

Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ 2009 result: $106,000 ❖ 2011 result: $124,500 ❖ 2011 non-DITA: $69,000Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ More CMS = more cost ❖ More realistic about costs? ❖ Reuse requires CMS?Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ Specialization ❖ Complex output requirements, especially PDF ❖ Legacy documentation conversion ❖ Content management systems implementation ❖ Large number of contributorsMonday, May 9, 2011

Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ “What CMS do you (or will you) use?” ❖ 33–34%: Do not use ❖ Other responses: Astoria, Author-it, Contenta, Docato, Documentum, IXIASOFT, Schema ST4, SharePoint, SiberLogic, Subversion, TIM-RS, Trisoft, Vasont, XDocs, and many, many more.Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ Past implementers: ❖ 50%: Do not use a CMS ❖ Leaders: Astoria, Vasont, IXIASOFT, XDocs ❖ Current implementers: ❖ 36%: Do not use a CMS ❖ Leaders: Astoria, SharePoint, TrisoftMonday, May 9, 2011

Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ “Not realizing the scope of the effort.” ❖ “Not planning for CMS integration.” ❖ “Lack of testing.” ❖ “Involving the marketing department.” ❖ “Implementing in a live production environment with the wrong tools, which were still being decided upon during live project development. Disaster!”Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ “Trying to use inexperienced offshore labor to do conversion/editing/development.” ❖ “Not using a vendor to convert our legacy documentation.” ❖ “Too little time reserved for conversion.” ❖ “Insufﬁcient imposition of consistency in styles before conversion to DITA. Insufﬁcient imposition of consistency in procedures before conversion to DITA.”Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ Document conversion a huge problem. ❖ Project complexity much higher than anticipated. ❖ Many complaints about “the wrong CMS.”Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ “General immaturity of many products in the XML/DITA space.” ❖ “The lack of excitement and initiative shown by DITA authors.” ❖ “The lack of enthusiasm among management.” ❖ “Major reduction of translation costs, over 50%.”Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ “One author never really understood topics.” ❖ “Productivity increased from 800 pages per writer per year to 3200+ pages per writer per year.” ❖ “Excessive amount of time spent using structured tools to enter content. Productivity has been reduced by an average of 40 percent.”Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ “People have responded very positively to our new and improved documentation, when we didnt expect that many people to notice or to take the time to respond.”Monday, May 9, 2011

❖ Issues with tools ❖ Lack of maturity ❖ Difﬁcult to use ❖ Change resistance…or notMonday, May 9, 2011

❖ scriptorium.com/resources/webcasts for the webcast recording in a day or two ❖ Check scriptorium.com/events for upcoming eventsMonday, May 9, 2011

❖ Sarah O’Keefe, okeefe@scriptorium.com Twitter: @sarahokeefeMonday, May 9, 2011

Monday, May 9, 2011

http://www.scriptorium.com	312
http://scriptorium.com	23
http://www.slideshare.net	1
http://www.linkedin.com	1

The state of structure, 2011

by Scriptorium Publishing

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

4 Embeds 337

Statistics

The state of structure, 2011 Webinar Transcript