TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
> I wouldn't attempt to do revision control on a
> heavily laid-out DTP file...
> perhaps you can educate them to review content in a
> simple word-processing
> format, then import it into your DTP tool after the
> content is approved.
> Separation of form and content, etc.
I take it a step further and separate reviewers from
source files, whether they're editing a draft copy or
not. Giving them a source file of any sort to hack
lends itself to problems. You don't want them
accidentally (or otherwise) deleting others' comments
and such. I prefer PDF for this reason. I maintain the
source and take their comments as, well, comments and
not ready-to-go changes. I then print out the comments
and store that comments file for future reference, so
at any point I can go back, say 2-3 years, to see why
a change was made (and who authorized or suggested it).
(because life is too short to be inept)
"As soon as you hear the phrase "studies show",
immediately put a hand on your wallet and cover your groin."
-- Geoff Hart
We can't all be as creative with sigs as krautgrrl. ;-)