Re: naming doc addendums ?

Subject: Re: naming doc addendums ?
From: Keith Hood <klhra -at- yahoo -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 18:31:55 -0800 (PST)

I would say, don't bother including the title of the main doc in the title of the addendum. So instead of the samples you gave in your post, just call it "Addendum X: Something". After all, the reader already knows the addendum is specific to that particular main document, so repeating the title of the main document is an unnecessary redundancy. Save yourself the key strokes and save the reader the eye scan time. Also, if the reader has to tell someone else the name of the addendum over the phone, he will want the shortest title that allows him to clearly identify the addendum.

In your document library, of course, you will need a filename or some kind of record keeping that clearly ties each addendum to its owning main document.



________________________________
From: Monique Semp <monique -dot- semp -at- earthlink -dot- net>
To: TechWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 12:40 PM
Subject: naming doc addendums ?

Hello, TechWR-L-ers,

I have a âgenericâ version of a doc and Iâm preparing customer-specific addenda for (of course) customer-specific info.

There wonât be an addendum for all customers, only for customers whose implementation has been customized to a degree that the generic doc is insufficient (with respect to one-off features, additional options for some generic features, deployment info thatâs different due to some customer system oddity, and the like).

But... I keep going back and forth as to what to name the addenda.

The main doc is âProduct-Name Operatorâs Guideâ.

So, which of the following is better, in terms of finding the doc in a folder with lots of similarly named docs (important not only for me and doc repository users, but also for the customer), making it easily discoverable by customers, and likely other things that I havenât realized the importance of yet?

* Customer-Name Addendum to the Product-Name Operatorâs Guide
* Product-Name Operatorâs Guide: Customer-Name Addendum
* something else?

Thanks for your thoughts,
-Monique
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

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

Previous by Author: Re: WRONG!..... -ish?
Next by Author: Re: cloud backup services, for EXE files ?
Previous by Thread: RE: naming doc addendums ?
Next by Thread: Is "video communications" a field?


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads