RE: Validating documentation

Subject: RE: Validating documentation
From: "Ednie, Catherine" <CEdnie -at- Eventra -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:17:57 -0500

>>alliance with our internal software QA department

I've worked at two software companies and both were set up this way. I
report to the head of QA and I send all manuals to QA for review. "Bugs" in
the manuals are tracked similarly to bugs in the software, after the initial
release. I think it's a very beneficial alliance as long as the timing of
releases does not create bottlenecks in QA. It's also helpful for the QA
department because they get very familiar with the contents of the
documentation and use it for training, test development, and answering
questions about the software which boomerang back to them. I like the setup
a lot.


Catherine Ednie, Technical Publications
eventra, Inc.
203-882-9988 ext. 2610
cednie -at- eventra -dot- com

PC Magazine gives RoboHelp Office 2002 five stars - a perfect score!
"The ultimate developer's tool for designing help systems. A product
no professional help designer should be without." Check out RoboHelp at

Check out the TECHWR-L Site redesign!

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.

Previous by Author: RE: If You Were Gonna Teach...
Next by Author: Link, Hyperlink, hotlink
Previous by Thread: Re: Validating documentation
Next by Thread: Re: Validating documentation

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads