RE: Version number question

Subject: RE: Version number question
From: "Robart, Kay" <Kay -dot- Robart -at- tea -dot- state -dot- tx -dot- us>
To: Hannah Drake <hannah -at- formulatrix -dot- com>, Jim Witkin <jameswitkin -at- gmail -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:01:56 +0000

I would consider it two new manuals, and start each with v 1.0. I don't think most users pay any attention to the versioning unless they are comparing two versions to see which one is the most recent. I think continuing the version might make any users that noticed wonder why they haven't seen the previous versions of those two manuals.

If you decide to continue the numbering, then probably start at 3.0, to indicate they are getting something substantially different.

Kay R.

-----Original Message-----
From: techwr-l-bounces+kay -dot- robart=tea -dot- state -dot- tx -dot- us -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+kay -dot- robart=tea -dot- state -dot- tx -dot- us -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf Of Hannah Drake
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 9:58 AM
To: Jim Witkin
Cc: techwr-l
Subject: Re: Version number question

I would continue the version numbers -- because now you would have two different manuals that start at version 4.3, for example. Plus, that way users know it's not V1 of something. People don't necessarily like knowing they're looking at a V1 -- of anything.

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Jim Witkin <jameswitkin -at- gmail -dot- com> wrote:

> I'm working on a manual that contains two primary sections: a
> technical description of the product and an installation section. The
> manual has gotten quite long and we've observed that the audience for
> each section is somewhat different. For example, installers don't need
> the 80 pages of technical description to install the product. Our
> plan is to split the manual in half and move forward with two manuals
> each with its own revision track. The current version number for the
> manual is v2.4. Question: When I split the manual should I start the
> version numbering at 1.0 for each of the two manuals? Or should the
> technical description manual maintain the previous numbering track and
> the installation manual start with new version numbering? Or vice
> versa? Or should both new manuals start with the previous manual's
> numbers and increment from there? Thx, Jim

New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for authoring.

Learn more:


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 for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @

Version number question: From: Jim Witkin
Re: Version number question: From: Hannah Drake

Previous by Author: RE: Hosted Help - server specs?
Next by Author: RE: On the value of glossaries containing terms the audience should already know
Previous by Thread: Re: Version number question
Next by Thread: RE: Version number question

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

Sponsored Ads

Sponsored Ads