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:Beta documentation quality From:p -dot- vuncanon -at- att -dot- net To:techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com Date:Mon, 05 Apr 2010 21:37:07 +0000
Does anyone out there have a list of criteria they adhere to for beta-quality documentation?
Some tech pub folks say that beta doc is merely a snapshot of the documentation as it stands at the beta release timeframe. Others say that as long as you have a Beta watermark on the beta doc than you should be covered. I was curious if there's a more rigorous set of criteria that anyone uses to decide if their doc is beta quality or not. Thanks.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Use Doc-To-Help's XML-based editor, Microsoft Word, or HTML and
produce desktop, Web, or print deliverables. Just write (or import)
and Doc-To-Help does the rest. Free trial: http://www.doctohelp.com
Explore CAREER options and paths related to Technical Writing,
learn to create SOFTWARE REQUIREMENTS documents, and
get tips on FUNCTIONAL SPECIFICATION best practices. Free at: http://www.ModernAnalyst.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
