Skip to content

Document tools comparison

Jump to bottom
Michael Jastram edited this page May 24, 2013 · 10 revisions

This page discusses different available tools, which can be used to create texts and documents. It outlines the pros and cons for every tool. Contributions to this document are welcome, comments can be made under this issue: https://github.com/openETCS/ecosystem/issues/52

ProR (part of Eclipse RMF)

ProR is a tool for working with textual requirements. It is comparable to a degree with DOORS and can exchange data with DOORS and other requirements tools, as it supports the open ReqIF exchange format (an OMG standard). It supports all features that you would expect from a modern requirements tool like atomic requirements, typed attributes, linking, rich text, etc. Disclaimer: Michael Jastram is the Eclipse Project Lead of RMF.

Download at http://eclipse.org/rmf/pror/

Pro:

  • Supports sophisticated requirements engineering features
  • Open Source
  • Uses an open file format (ReqIF)
  • Compatible with versioning systems (including git)
  • Available on all Platforms
  • Integration with model-based Eclipse tools very easy

Contra:

  • Usability could be better in some areas
  • Some "standard" features are not yet implemented (e.g. search/replace)
  • Experienced Project Partners (Estimation): 5%

#LateX

Pro:

  • Powerful mark up
  • Transformable to almost everything
  • Compatible with Git versioning
  • Available for all platforms
  • Open Source tooling

Contra:

  • Usability

Experienced Project Partners (Estimation): 60%

#MS Office

Pro:

  • Powerful mark up
  • Usability

Contra:

  • Commercial Tool
  • Not available for Linux
  • Not compatible with Git

Experienced Project Partners (Estimation): 90%

#Doors

Pro:

  • Tracebility
  • Requirements Management

Contra:

  • Commercial Tool
  • Not compatible with Git
  • Training required

Experienced Project Partners (Estimation): 30%

#Open Doc This is a placeholder for any xml-based open document format

Pro:

  • Usability
  • Powerful mark up
  • Compatible with Git (not as good as LateX)

Contra:

  • Evaluation of different possibilities necessary

Experienced Project Partners (Estimation): 20%

#Mark Down (GitHub Wiki) Pro:

  • Easy-to-use (no installation required)
  • Hyperlinking between pages
  • Fully versioned in Git

Contra:

  • Creation of "printable" document requires additional work
  • No "document management" such as ToC, etc.
  • Doesn't scale for big documents

Experienced Project Partners (Estimation): 40%

Clone this wiki locally