Re: Validating documentation

Subject: Re: Validating documentation
From: Andrew Plato <intrepid_es -at- yahoo -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 16:27:56 -0800 (PST)

"Michael Oboryshko" wrote

> Andrew wrote:
> > Engineers don't blame writers when their code fails to run.
> Sure they do:
> "We aren't going to fix that problem - it wasn't in the
> requirements document."

Bad engineers.

> "Oh, you mean my code's not running because there's an IP block
> on the application server? Why wasn't that documented?..."

Bad writers.

> "We just spent three days trying to fix our code... turns out
> the problem was caused by an undocumented IIS bug..."
> ... and so on.

Bad Microsoft.

> And most engineers whine like a stuck bearing when they get new
> requirements at the last minute. For writers, that's exactly
> what system changes are -- new requirements.

Bad luck.

Adapt, improvise, press-on.

Andrew Plato

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards®

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
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: Validating documentation
Next by Author: Re: Re; Validating documentation
Previous by Thread: Re: Validating documentation
Next by Thread: Re: Validating Documentation

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

Sponsored Ads