One of the challenges for organisations moving to a new content management system for their user documentation is selecting an authoring tool that is:
- powerful enough, and
- can be used by non-Technical Authors as well as the professional Technical Authors.
Many organisations want staff, such as developers, to be able to add content to the system directly – without having to pass it over to the Technical Publications department. The difficulty lies in that many tools for authoring in DITA and other XML schemas are daunting to those unfamiliar with the underlying principles of DITA and structured content. It’s even more challenging if you’re someone who is only going to write content occasionally.
One approach is to create templates, with defined fields that need to be filled in. Another is to get staff to write in Word, again in conjunction with a template, import the text into the content management system and then map metadata and other semantic information to the content at that stage.
Is it an unsurmountable problem? Should we just accept that writing semi-structured XHTML content (such as wiki-based content or WordPress-like authoring environments) is a better compromise? What you lose in modularity, you gain in having an easy-to-use authoring environment. Alternatively, do we need to recognize we’ll always need specialists who can convert text into the appropriate format - the equivalent of the typing pool or typesetters?
It has bearing on the role and value of Technical Authors. Is it their main value in writing skills, information management skills, editing skills or in using a specialist tool? If the organisation believes “everyone can write well”, then is their value in using software that’s complex and tricky to use?