RE: Documentation review?

Subject: RE: Documentation review?
From: "James Jones" <doc-x -at- earthlink -dot- net>
To: "'TECHWR-L'" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:21:51 -0600

Seems to me that the replies that were given by Beth Agnew and Geoff Hart
were generally on the money. I will add my two cents, which I hope will be
worth more to you.

It seems that you have quite a time restraint, and you have a lot of stuff
to be reviewed too. Chances are that a lot of the material that you will be
asking people to review is repeated in different forms, over and over, in
the different materials.

I'd say make specific lists of what specific things to look for, for each
reviewer. For example, I suppose that they should be looking for errors or
inaccuracies in content and not in the presentation, format, or written

Jim Jones


Now Shipping -- WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word! Easily create online
Help. And online anything else. Redesigned interface with a new
project-based workflow. Try it today!

Doc-To-Help 2005 now has RoboHelp Converter and HTML Source: Author
content and configure Help in MS Word or any HTML editor. No
proprietary editor! *August release.

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- infoinfocus -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit

To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Documentation review?: From: Geoff Hart

Previous by Author: re Two Contracts?
Next by Author: RE: RoboHELP baby
Previous by Thread: Documentation review?
Next by Thread: Re: Documentation review

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads