RE: naming doc addendums ?

Subject: RE: naming doc addendums ?
From: "Weissman, Jessica" <WeissmanJ -at- abacustech -dot- com>
To: Monique Semp <monique -dot- semp -at- earthlink -dot- net>, TechWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:41:39 -0500

In that case, why not put all the supplements for one company into one doc, with extra section dividers indicating which main doc each supplement belongs to.

- Jessica
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

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-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com


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

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at http://techwhirl.com

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives


References:
naming doc addendums ?: From: Monique Semp
Re: naming doc addendums ?: From: Monique Semp

Previous by Author: Re: Employment....
Next by Author: RE: Question for writers in New Zealand and Australia
Previous by Thread: Re: naming doc addendums ?
Next by Thread: Re: naming doc addendums ?


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads