The State of Structure

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.