I know that it's not a good idea to open a structured FrameMaker file in the unstructured FrameMaker interface, and that there's a warning about this when you try.
What's come up for us however is whether there's any problem with people using the Structured FrameMaker interface to edit unstructured files.
We have a machine set up for people who are not expert or highly skilled with FrameMaker, and since we have both structured and unstructured documents, the question is whether to leave it set as the structured interface, or the unstructured interface. They're just making small content edits in most cases, for anything more involved they ask me.
So:
If it's set to unstructured:
- If they open an unstructured document, all is well.
- If they try to open a structured document, they will see the warning. I can tell them what to do if they see it. (This might mean telling them to change to structured, or just to give me that file to edit instead.)
If it's set to structured:
- If they open a structured document, no problem.
- If they open an unstructured document however -- is there any danger if they edit it that way? Will saving from structured FrameMaker change anything about the file?
In the latter case, opening unstructured in structured Frame, there's no warning, it just opens with a blank structure view window, if they even open that window.
I have to imagine that Adobe separated the two interfaces for a reason, but possibly it has more to do with just not needing all of the resources like XML and DITA menus when you're in unstructured.
I realize that the real answer is not to let people unskilled with FrameMaker use it to edit documents, but this is the way things are for the moment. If it's set to unstructured, they'll have to switch over in order to edit structured files, and then be sure to remember to switch back. Leaving it set as structured in some ways seems the best choice, but only if it won't damage unstructured files that way.
Thanks