June 2003 Columns
Content Management Using AuthorIT | A Report from the WinWriters Conference | Using Screen Capture for Single Sourcing| STC @ 50: Single-Sourcing Topics at the Annual Conference
David Garrett is president of Znxt Corporation <http://www.znxt.com>, a Denver firm that specializes in sales, support, and training for AuthorIT software.
Content Management Using AuthorIT
AuthorIT is a content management
system and, as such, exceeds the functionality of a single-source solution. A
single-source solution is essentially a conversion strategy in which the
content is authored with one tool and lives within that tool’s format.
The content is subsequently converted to another format and, sometimes, the
content is modified for different purposes during the conversion.
A conversion from Microsoft Word to WinHelp using a tool such as RoboHELP is
an example of one such conversion or single-source strategy. A conversion from
Framemaker to WinHelp using WebWorks Publisher is another example.
AuthorIT is a true content management system because the content is stored in a database, not in a document format, such as Word’s or Framemaker’s. The content is truly separate from format and structure. Storing the content in a database also gives AuthorIT several defining functionalities of a content management system, such as user- and group-level security, workflow capabilities, version control, and component-level access.
Most importantly, everything in AuthorIT lives at a component level. Typically, a single-source solution converts one document type to another document type, with some content modification. The level of granularity for a single-source solution is typically the document or file level. A Word or Framemaker document is the data layer. In a single-source solution, document components (paragraphs, for instance) do not have any individual existence and are therefore difficult to locate for reuse. Reuse is a major contributor to positive return-on-investment (ROI) for any single-source or content-management solution. The absence of component-level reuse means that most single-source approaches are only marginally effective in transforming content into a real knowledge asset.
AuthorIT usually appeals more to people within an organization who are interested not only in saving time and money during production, but who are also very cognizant that, in an information society, the organization’s accumulation of words and pictures can constitute an enormous bottom-line asset, if those words and pictures are immediately accessible when needed. Because most technical communicators are concerned solely with production efficiencies and not with developing an organization-wide knowledge asset, they see little advantage in AuthorIT over popular single-source toolsets.
Some of the advantages of a component-level content management system over a single-source conversion strategy are:
-
Components can be used in many different documents for many different purposes and presented in many different formats. The monetary value of the component increases dramatically with each reuse. If it takes me an hour to write a component and my cost as an employee is $20/hour, then that component is worth $20 if used once. If it can be used five times, it is worth $100 (and that is only in terms of cost savings, if the component is used to generate revenue because, for instance, it is used in a training class that customers pay for, the value increases all the more).
-
A content management system sits on top of a database. Databases have important functionalities that word processors do not have. Security based on group and individual permissions is one. This capability means two things: one is that content can be secured at several levels. In AuthorIT, content can be secured at the component level and the file folder level. This means that the same database that holds software procedures can also store sensitive accounting procedures or even employee data. Access is tightly controlled, but, when appropriate, the content from two wildly divergent departments can still be shared. Secondly, security means that the use of the system can be streamlined so that users see only what they need to see and can perform only the functions they need to perform. In other words, access to content through AuthorIT can be dumbed down so that users do not have to master the intricacies of a sophisticated word processor in order to review and annotate content.
-
Templates and styles can be locked down. Again, this is a function of the security features of a database as well as a deliberate design decision on the part of the AuthorIT creators. In AuthorIT, there is no such thing as local formatting. Everything has a style attached to it. Style definitions can be made off-limits to all users except the styles guru. When a template is attached to a component, that template makes certain publishing characteristics unchangeable. The creativity of effort lies at the organizational level, not the individual level. Not only does this enforce organizational standards, it eliminates production inefficiencies caused by contributors fooling with styles and layout.
The benefits of managing and reusing content is
dependent on separating content from structure and formatting. Content cannot
easily be reused if it is tightly bound to a document’s structure and an
output’s format. One of aspects of XML that makes it of so much interest to
people who deal with vast amounts of content is that XML content is stored
separately from its structure and formatting.
The heart of this idea is that the valuable content is relatively constant,
while the structure and formatting are variables that can be changed readily
for different purposes. The content acquires more value because it is tagged
(with tags defined in the DTD) but otherwise left in a neutral state.
Therefore, content, that exists at a suitable level of granularity and is
tagged for identification, can be organized using various structures and
formatted for different purposes. The ideal of a knowledge asset is realized:
the content endures and is reusable. The structure and formatting are
transitory and are used for a specific purpose.
AuthorIT accomplishes this goal with the use of mature relational database tools and an accessible user interface. While AuthorIT is not an XML tool, it uses relational database analogs to accomplish the same goals as an object-oriented (XML) database.
AuthorIT has one major advantage over an XML solution. Whereas an XML solution typically needs to be developed, the AuthorIT solution simply needs to be purchased at a cost that is less than that of a RoboHELP license.
The cost savings that potentially accrue to a content management strategy are easy to imagine but difficult to quantify. However, a recent cost comparison among three projects showed that using AuthorIT saved an average of 2.16 hours per page in production time. This study compared using RoboHELP and MS Word as part of a conversion strategy versus using AuthorIT in a component strategy. In all projects the outputs were hardcopy and online help. Overall, the AuthorIT projects saved an average 138.5 hours (the projects were relatively small, resulting in production of from 76 to 98 pages of documentation per project).
We can estimate that a mid-level technical communicator costs his or her employer about $43.50 per hour (based on a salary of $60,000 and a 30% load factor). So we conclude that the use of AuthorIT saved about $6,000.00 on these projects. If you consider the cost savings in an organization that produces several hundreds or thousands of pages of documentation, you begin to see the financial benefit of true content management.
The opinions expressed by contributors to the Society for Technical Communication (STC) World Wide Web site are solely those of the individual writers and do not reflect the opinions of STC, the members of the STC administrative council, or STC World Wide Web volunteers.
Reference herein to any specific commercial firm, commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Society for Technical Communication (STC).
