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.
Subject:RE: Word to the wise From:"McLauchlan, Kevin" <Kevin -dot- McLauchlan -at- safenet-inc -dot- com> To:"Bill Swallow" <techcommdood -at- gmail -dot- com>, <arroxaneullman -at- aol -dot- com> Date:Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:46:46 -0500
Bill Swallow asked:
> Easy solution: Forward John's e-mail to said penny-pincher with a note
> that says "Is a $n purchase for a tool that will validate my syntax
> worth potentially shipping a defective product"?
> And John, where was QA? Don't you have people do final release
> candidate testing to find glaring problems like these before the
> product leaves the company?
My experience of QA (in more than one company) is that they are as
resource-constrained as anybody else, so they would likely have gone
through the process of a customer's first/main experience of the
product, and would therefore have been following the sequence of pages
that guided the user through configuration or basic admin procedures,
but would not necessarily have visited more obscure or advanced pages.
At the end of the QA cycle, they would just visit a quick,
representative sample of pages. If those were OK, the assumption is that
the previous successful use of the product and its Help have not been
There's a reason that QA in the aircraft industry, some of the medical
equipment industry, and (one hopes) the nuclear industry, takes so much
longer and the whole process of getting a product ready for release can
take years, instead of the weeks-or-months that the rest of us often
But on the other hand, while I agree that the company should be paying
for the necessary tools, aren't there FOSS validators out there?
The information contained in this electronic mail transmission
may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected
from disclosure. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by replying to this
message and deleting it from your computer without copying
or disclosing it.
Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more. http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-