Anyone implementing a content management system faces the question of whether to import existing documentation into the new system or to rewrite everything from scratch. Importing sounds tempting because it seems to require less work. However, the following comparison of the thoughts and expectations of the client and the consultant illustrates what follow-up work will be necessary and what preparatory work is worthwhile.

Customer Feedback

When we implemented the system, we made a point of ensuring that the new system had an import function for Word documents. That’s because during the implementation phase, we had a double workload—populating the system with initial data and handling day-to-day operations. Importing is much faster and easier than creating new documents in XML. We just press the import button, and everything is in the system.

Thoughts from the Consultant

Well, a CCMS manages modules, not files or chapters. Do you have any modules that you can import? If not, then when importing, let a simple automated process handle the modularization of your existing documentation—a process that designates every section with a heading as a module without further analysis and does not perform any further division. Yet this further division would be particularly important for the next point.

Modularization

A CCMS is based on the principle of reuse. However, the import routine does not recognize whether a module can be reused and therefore does not need to be imported again. Do you have a matrix that shows which modules you reuse in which structures or documents? If not, you will likely create duplicates during import. Duplicates and copies, however, are poison in a system where each piece of content is allowed to exist only once. This poison makes the system inconsistent, cumbersome, and expensive. This calls for preparatory or follow-up work—namely, modularization.

Standardization

A CCMS offers sophisticated control over structures: tree structures composed of modules and fragments for the high-level structure, and XML for the low-level structure. The import routine attempts—literally by any means necessary—to recognize these structures during import. For example, it asks which paragraph formats are used to format the warnings in accordance with ANSI Z535.6: Signal word, type and source of the hazard, consequences of non-compliance, preventive measures. Anyone who has not created and consistently used dedicated formats for this in Word—or who has used these paragraph formats for other text that has nothing to do with warning notices—will be surprised by the result of the import—and not in a good way. This requires preparatory or follow-up work, namely standardization.

Classification

When importing, the naming and storage of texts and images are handled by a simple automated process, which does not necessarily make it easier to locate a specific image or text. All modules end up in the same folder, as do all images. Metadata is not automatically created or assigned. This requires preparatory or follow-up work, namely classification.

Importing Requires Follow-Up Work

However, importing always makes sense if you have a document that is written and structured in a concise, consistent, and standards-compliant manner. You can also create a separate “master document” specifically for importing, which describes as many product options and variants as possible in order to import as much content as possible. This document will then no longer correspond to an actual product. The only important thing is that it is written perfectly in terms of spelling, terminology, and style; that all sections are structured and formatted uniformly; and that all rules of the editorial guidelines are followed. Paragraph formats should correspond to the XML elements, and character formats to the XML attributes. Nevertheless, additional work is still required here—namely for cross-references, variables, fragments, table revisions, filtering and merging modules into documents, organizing them into folders, layout adjustments, and often illustrations as well, among many other tasks.

CCMS as an Opportunity for a Fresh Start

A CCMS doesn’t automatically produce clear and understandable instructions. The import routine readily accepts run-on sentences, nested clauses, and typos. If your documentation is getting a bit outdated, the style guide is more current than the documents themselves, or the usability of your existing documents leaves something to be desired, then implementing a CCMS is your chance for a fresh start! It’s time to finally break with old habits! Back to the roots! Finally apply functional design consistently, finally get terminology right, finally correct style, forms of address, and readability! And finally maintain structural consistency across all documents!

Quality at last. You can't import that. It takes work.
But it's worth it.