RE: RoboHelp docs (was: AuthorIT feedback)

Subject: RE: RoboHelp docs (was: AuthorIT feedback)
From: BlaineBachman -at- bia -dot- gov
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 08:12:36 -0700

Chuck Martin wrote in part:

"I think it's especially egregious when software designed for creating
documentation has missing our lousy documentation itself. RoboHELP is
another example of a product with poor docs; I rarely have found what I
needed when I had a question using that tool."

Assuming you're referring to the paper documentation, I would agree. We're
using RH2000, and due to the sketchiness of the accompanying paper, we have
found occasion to peruse the RH7 books (and the "...For Dummies" book) to
find out how to do something. This got me to thinking, "Why is the paper
documentation getting 'worse and worse' with each successive release?"

Then I remembered thinking how 'funny' it was that a purveyor of an online
help development tool would ship books along with the product in the first
place. Maybe what I was looking for was in the online help! Sure enough -
and so far, I haven't been disappointed.

So to put a different spin on this, IMHO BlueSky is trying to do what its
product is there to help us do; include good (if not excellent) online help
with the product.


Previous by Author: Wanted: RoboHelp Project Pothole Alerts
Next by Author: Re: PDF's Last Gasp and Chaos
Previous by Thread: RE: html help - key files
Next by Thread: RE: RoboHelp docs (was: AuthorIT feedback)

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads