Re: Developments in the review cycle

Subject: Re: Developments in the review cycle
From: Keith Hood <bus -dot- write -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: Erika Yanovich <ERIKA_y -at- rad -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 17:12:56 -0500

Like everything else I can name, the "good old days" model of documentation
production was a reality in only a very tiny minority of companies, and a
pipe dream everywhere else. I've been a tech writer for 25 years, and only
once have I worked in a company where your waterfall model was actually in
use. Everywhere else, it was always a confused jumble.

What's the difference between "dynamic" and "chaotic"? The places I've
been, I couldn't see a dime's worth difference between them.

<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#m_9137211260145901749_DDB4FAA8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 12:07 AM, Erika Yanovich <ERIKA_y -at- rad -dot- com> wrote:

> In the "good old days", tech writers followed the Outline-First
> draft-Second-draft-Camera ready model. We would submit an entire
> publication for review (perhaps with some minor TBDs inside) and the world
> was a simpler place.
>
> What I see nowadays is more dynamic: partial drafts (or bunch of topics)
> sent to different reviewers at different times. The stages are blurred and
> the follow-up more complicated.
>
> I know some of you don't believe in complete publications anymore, just in
> separate topics that get compiled daily (or whenever) into a larger entity,
> but publications are still alive and kicking out there.
>
> So my questions are:
> 1. Do you also see this transformation?
> 2. If yes, how do you cope with it?
> 3. Should we manage each chunk separately according to the old model
> (sounds a bit crazy) or replace the old model with a new one?
>
> Erika
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and
> content development | http://techwhirl.com
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as bus -dot- write -at- gmail -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
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | http://techwhirl.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-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


Follow-Ups:

References:
Developments in the review cycle: From: Erika Yanovich

Previous by Author: Re: Developments in the review cycle
Next by Author: Re: Developments in the review cycle
Previous by Thread: Re: Developments in the review cycle
Next by Thread: Re: Developments in the review cycle


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads