n this webcast, Sarah O'Keefe discusses how to calculate the return on investment of an XML/DITA implementation for technical content. If you are considering XML and DITA, but are trying to figure out whether you can justify the cost and effort, this session is for you. You'll learn how to communicate the rationale for XML in terms that management understands.

1. Sarah O’Keefe, Scriptorium Publishing
background image
flickr: thelastminute

2. ! Founder and president, Scriptorium
Publishing
! Content strategy for
tech comm
! Interested in collision of
content, publishing, and
technology

3. ! My ID: @sarahokeefe
! Scriptorium: @ScriptoriumTech
! #techcomm or #dita may be appropriate

4. ! 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

5. ! Business case examples (with numbers)
! YMMV
! IANAL
! WYSIOO
! Big-picture musings on other issues
(without numbers)

6. Flickr: iancarroll

7. ! Estimate 30–50 percent of total
localization cost is desktop publishing
! With XML-based publishing, you can
squeeze that cost to under 10 percent
! Cost savings: $20K–$40K per $100K in
localization cost

8. Flickr: a-m-photo

9. ! Baseline assumption:
! DITA = increased content reuse!
! 10,000 topics
! Development cost: $200 per topic
(4!hours x $50)
! 5% more content reuse = $100,000 in
savings (and additional savings in
localization)

10. ! Calculate cost of updates in multiple
documents
! Consider error rates
! Don’t forget the mental health toll

11. ! Software error messages
! Product specifications in product
database and datasheets
! Product descriptions
! Training
! Tech support

12. ! Improve collaboration among writers
! Develop and enforce consistent style
standards

13. “You should not implement XML as a
substitute for creating a style guide.”

14. “Structure is no substitute for
management.”

15. Flickr: kevenlaw

16. ! Share topics
! Communicate updates
! Minimize content “ownership” issues
! Smooth out inevitable conflicts
! Cooperate on assignments

17. Photo: www.christianholmer.com

18. ! Multiple conditional dimensions
(platform, customer, audience, product)
! Huge number of possible variations
! Dynamic versioning instead of static
publishing of a limited number of
variations

19. ! Eliminate redundancy
! More targeted information
! Meet customer requirement for
personalized documentation
! Enable more versioning than supported
in current toolset
! Enable dynamic publishing

20. ! 40 variations of a deliverable
! Configure and publish one at a time:
! 1 hour per variant
! 40 hours of work per deliverable, per
release ($2,000)
! Dynamic publishing: publish once

21. ! Tagging work does not change for static
versus dynamic publishing
! Programming effort to enable dynamic
publishing included in implementation
cost

22. Photo: Rachel Houghton

23. flickr: uhop

24. Flickr: chris_radcliff

25. ! If product revenue is $1M per year, then
each week of availability is worth about
$20K in revenue.
! Accelerate delivery of first language
! Reduce delays in shipping localized
versions

26. Flickr: ccharmon

27. David Kelly
Senior Technical Consultant
www.scriptorium.com/blog/2010/09/the-promise-of-xml-publishing.html

28. ! Source content in XML
! Transform to accommodate
user-generated content
! Use metadata to support unified search

29. ! Topic-based rather than deliverable-
based publishing
! Incremental deliveries for localization
! Content deliveries decoupled from
software deliveries

30. ! Measure how topics are used
! Act on information about:
! Popular topics
! Unpopular topics
! Unsuccessful searches
! Topics with lots of comments

31. ! Source: “The state of structure in
technical communication,” 2009.
www.scriptorium.com/blog/2010/05/
the-state-of-structure-in-technical-
communication.html

32. ! Localization
! Increased reuse
! Support for complex conditionality
! Faster time to market
! Support for new publishing architecture

33. ! Software integration issues
! Complex output/formatting requirements
! Inconsistent source files
! Source files that are not topic-based
! Content management system
! People

35. ! Dysfunctional teams
! Information hoarding during
implementation
! Tool-specific blinders
! Using XML/DITA to clone an existing,
problematic workflow

36. ! Improve communication
! Improve collaboration
! Build trust
! Provide project roadmap early

37. ! Do not reward this behavior
! Implicitly
! Explicitly
! Avoid communication bottlenecks
! Document project decisions
! Distribute project information

38. ! Ask for open minds
! Consider new features, not just cloning
old features
! Try out a variety of XML tools

39. ! Identify best and worst features of
current workflow
! Identify new requirements that can’t be
met with current workflow
! Understand how new workflow affects
authors

40. Topics 2,000+
Writers 10+
Supported languages 3+
Deliverable formats 2+
flickr: booleansplit

41. ! Researching adoption rates, issues, tools
! Open until March 1
! Participants get free results
! http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/
structure
! Please participate, and tell your friends!

42. ! February 8: Attractive DITA output (it IS
possible)!
! March: Trends in technical
communication, 2011
! April: Structured authoring survey
results

44. ! Sarah O’Keefe
! www.scriptorium.com
! okeefe@scriptorium.com
! @sarahokeefe