Outrageous: Was Pray for me

Subject: Outrageous: Was Pray for me
From: "Tim Altom" <taltom -at- simplywritten -dot- com>
To: "Sigrid Schoepel" <sschoepe -at- adacgeo -dot- com>, "TechDoc List" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 08:27:46 -0500

Excuse me, but I have to point something out here...this post, as well as
several others, have purported to rescue the original poster from a jam. But
nobody so far has noted that the product in question is a medical one,
requiring FDA approval. Under these conditions why on earth should the
writer in question even be considering doing these kludgy workarounds? This
isn't an obscure accounting package; it's intended for saving life and/or
limb. Why is this being allowed to take place? Are we not countenancing this
by offering these pathetic rescue tidbits?

If the manual is as scatter-brained as indicated in the exchange of posts,
using it for single source is, at best, an attempt to make management feel
like it's accomplishing something, when in fact it's being given what will
undoubtedly be of little value, and could actively hurt someone. The fact
that the text is supposedly the same as the original is of little comfort.
Text requires context for complete communication, and hypertext destroys
print contexts. No amount of frantic tagging will substitute for proper
context. Such a rag-tag effort may be excusable in a product less vital, but
in a medical device? Something strikes me as fundamentally wrong here. The
fact that Sigrid mentions having an almost identical situation is extremely
disturbing to me.

Tim Altom
Simply Written, Inc.
Featuring FrameMaker and the Clustar(TM) System
"Better communication is a service to mankind."
317.562.9298
Check our Web site for the upcoming Clustar class info
http://www.simplywritten.com

----- Original Message -----
From: Sigrid Schoepel <sschoepe -at- adacgeo -dot- com>
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 7:25 AM
Subject: Re: Pray for me


> Having just been through almost the exact same thing, I can attest to the
fact
> that it's going to take long hours but that it can happen. (I work for a a
> medical devices company who wants to be able to say at a tradeshow, that
begins
> today, that they've submitted the 510k for a product. What they had failed
to
> add into their plan for the submission was a copy of the user
documentation and
> a copy of the test plans. The manglement only realized, and informed us,
about
> 3-4 weeks ago that we had to write the user dox and test plans.)
>






Previous by Author: Re: Pray for me
Next by Author: Re: Outrageous: Was Pray for me
Previous by Thread: RE: WebWorks Publisher Training
Next by Thread: Re: Outrageous: Was Pray for me


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads