RE: ISO better tools - Now Feedback

Subject: RE: ISO better tools - Now Feedback
From: "Daniel Ng" <kjng -at- gprotechnologies -dot- com>
To: "'Rick Stone'" <rstone75 -at- kc -dot- rr -dot- com>, "'Robert Lauriston'" <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>, "'techwr-l'" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 16:09:35 +0800

*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(r) Pro*
I'll explain this from the perspective of an end user of documentation
that's had some feedback mechanism namely, Microsoft's MSDN user
documentation site for Team Foundation Server.
Essentially readers can leave comments at the bottom of each topic.

When TFS v1.0 came out, there was an article on recovery the database. But
for some reason a crucial step was left out. Interestingly, there was a
comment by a user who detected that error, who then wrote a quick solution
for users, like us who faced the problem caused by the missing step.

A few weeks or months later, Microsoft's Team Foundation team posted a new
version of the TFS administrator's online guide - problem topic was updated
(CHM and webhelp) with the fix incorporated. Job done. Satisfied users.


This is the type of productive two way contextual communication between
reader and writer that makes good business sense as well. It was something
that was very apparent before in some of the major open source technical
manuals but have since found their way,in a good way, into driving updates
for commercial product's documentation.


If you've used the PHP or Apache Tech reference documentation site, you'll
notice the same thing, users can add comments to the bottom of topics like
article and news websites today. Very often for amateru coders you get the
added benefit of good code samples that isn't covered in the technical
documentation. Great help!


Daniel

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Stone [mailto:rstone75 -at- kc -dot- rr -dot- com]
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 7:18 AM
To: Robert Lauriston; techwr-l
Subject: Was: ISO better tools - Now Feedback

Hi all

Okay, it would be way cool if someone could please post something that
substantiates the use of feedback mechanisms such as how many views, etc.

I see these questions all the time across various fora. Company X advertises
that their tool Y is capable of tracking all this wonderful feedback about
how many times topic Z has been hit.

Can someone please advise how this helps me in the real world? Sure, topic Z
may be more popular than topic A. Does that make topic A more valuable than
topic C that seldom gets hit? Does it mean that topic C becomes an eventual
candidate for deletion and removal from the help system? What about topic Z?
Does it mean that you do something special with it? Develop an FAQ that
contains topic Z perhaps?

Or what about statistical reports that infer a user normally traverses a
path from topic Z to topic B to topic D before finally stopping at topic L?
How do you know topic L is really the topic that solved the issue and not
simply where everyone eventually concludes the help had nothing they were
looking for and they gave up?

These reports are great and all, but how do real world help authors use them
when the moment release 7.1 is made public management is pouncing on you
asking why documentation isn't yet complete for 7.2 or 8?

Cheers... Rick :)


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Are you looking for one documentation tool that does it all? Author,
build, test, and publish your Help files with just one easy-to-use tool.
Try the latest Doc-To-Help 2009 v3 risk-free for 30-days at:
http://www.doctohelp.com/

Help & Manual 5: The all-in-one help authoring tool. True single- sourcing --
generate 8 different formats and as many different versions as you need
from just one project. Fast and intuitive. http://www.helpandmanual.com/

---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


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

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat


References:
in search for better tools: From: GILLIOTTE Valérie
Re: in search for better tools: From: Robert Lauriston
RE: in search for better tools: From: Sharon Burton
RE: in search for better tools: From: Combs, Richard
RE: in search for better tools: From: Kat Kuvinka
RE: in search for better tools: From: Sharon Burton
Re: in search for better tools: From: Robert Lauriston
RE: in search for better tools: From: Connie Giordano
Re: in search for better tools: From: Robert Lauriston
RE: in search for better tools: From: Dan Goldstein
Re: in search for better tools: From: Robert Lauriston
Was: ISO better tools - Now Feedback: From: Rick Stone

Previous by Author: RE: in search for better tools
Next by Author: RE: ISO better tools - Now Feedback
Previous by Thread: Re: Was: ISO better tools - Now Feedback
Next by Thread: RE: ISO better tools - Now Feedback


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads