I'd like to address the red herring (lurking if not actually swimming in this topic) about whether the file format is native XML. Because that point is immaterial... No matter what format you use for storage, the stored file has to be converted to some binary representation that your authoring tool can manipulate. Even your favorite browser, while it would claim native HTML, converts the HTML to a binary format that it can render with formatting and dynamics. Competitors of Maker have made this claim in the past -- that Maker is not native SGML/XML, but that they are. That's hogwash. The so-called native XML has to be loaded into an internal model that the tool uses, period.
The issue to consider here is whether the tool's model suits your needs. No tool comes with a model to handle all schemas and DTDs out of the box. And it is true that the Maker model was developed before SGML was on the Frame Technology radar. As far as I know, the one place where this is a problem is in tables -- you can't have tables within tables. To a lesser degree (it causes some extra translations effort), you have to deal with differences such as graphics handling, where FrameMaker binary representations correspond to attributes that you have to declare in read/write rules. And some markup constructs need to be collapsed into FrameMaker markers... Details at that level cause more effort to set up your application, and they are artifacts of the FrameMaker binary model having been designed before the advent of SGML. But I repeat... The only thing you cannot do in Maker (that I'm aware of) is tables within tables. Alongside these considerations, you should look at your work flow and desired output. Do you need tables within tables? Are you looking at PDF output? Do you already have FrameMaker in the house? How much will it cost to deploy FrameMaker structured apps compared to other products? There are cases for and against FrameMaker here. But please, when somebody tells you that FrameMaker isn't *native* XML, take a look beneath the surface of that statement. You could just as easily say that FrameMaker natively supports XML and FrameMaker binary. So it's twice as good. Either statement is rediculous. cud
