Re: Looks like we'll have to agree...

Subject: Re: Looks like we'll have to agree...
From: "Brad Jensen" <brad -at- elstore -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 23:59:46 -0600

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Plato" <intrepid_es -at- yahoo -dot- com>
> Its why I gain such pleasure in pounding process freaks. I know
they mean
> well and honestly, I agree in principle with the ideas. Its just
that most
> processes are so terribly disconnected from reality that its
almost not
> worth thinking about them. Processes are usually adopted to make
> feel better - not actually work better. The odd thing is - when
> fell better, they will work better. Thus, people think the
process makes
> them more efficient, when it actually is just the feeling that
> doing things "correctly" that is changing everything.

I tend to think that process is designed to soak up excess
productivity and fulfill the social interaction needs of work

I'm about to write a workflow system for /imaging/general business
process/content management. I've already got the impression that
people hate work flow systems because they actually implement
process and take most of the fun out of it, even if they make the
process much more efficient.

As the owner of my company, I can already see that workflow
applied to our own sales process would make it much more
efficient, and help the sales manager train new people faster,
monitor the process for our proespects. Assuming that our
software is a benefit to the people who buy it, it will enable us
to approach and serve many more people, so it will be a boon to
them also (we do report and image archiving systems for midrange
and mainframe computers//and an elearning system) but I don't
expect the salespeople to like this system, at least not at first.
It will make them more money too.

We are developing the workflow system as a product to sell,
because our prospects demand it. I'm trying to figure out how to
drive most of it thru XML and XSLT, thru email delivery. I've been
reading the Oreilly XML book, where they say don't use the
Microsoft XSLT parser - but don't tell me how to use anything else
in the browser.

> You don't. So you do the best you can and fix the errors in the
next rev.
> This is technical documentation, not brain surgery. Nobody will
die if it
> isn't perfect.

Unless it is technical documentation ON brain surgery. Or medical
equipment, for example.

> > I can't have my docs done for RC. It's just not possible.
> > I can give them a draft, but then what if the product is ready
to go
> > straight to Golden Release?
> Its just the way it goes sometimes. You have to adapt...or die.

"Make my day, Programmer!"

Brad Jensen Simplified elearning development

Collect Royalties, Not Rejection Letters! Tell us your rejection story when you
submit your manuscript to iUniverse Nov. 6 -Dec. 15 and get five free copies of
your book. What are you waiting for?

Have you looked at the new content on TECHWR-L lately?
See and check it out.

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Re: Looks like we'll have to agree...: From: Andrew Plato

Previous by Author: Glossary functions and features in elearning
Next by Author: Re: Applying On-Line
Previous by Thread: Re: Looks like we'll have to agree...
Next by Thread: RE: Looks like we'll have to agree...

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

Sponsored Ads