RE: Basic question on SharePoint usage: to guarantee access to the (most recent) published version

Subject: RE: Basic question on SharePoint usage: to guarantee access to the (most recent) published version
From: Lin Laurie <linlaurie1 -at- hotmail -dot- com>
To: Avraham Makeler <amakeler -at- gmail -dot- com>, "techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 00:18:14 +0000

Hi Avraham,

I never give readers access to the work in process documents. I have a whole separate SP site for them to use for "published" documents. And no search on my working repository. That way they never see anything except my published material and the issues you mentioned don't happen. I hope this helps.

Lin

-----Original Message-----
From: techwr-l-bounces+linlaurie1=hotmail -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+linlaurie1=hotmail -dot- com -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf Of Avraham Makeler
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 3:39 PM
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Subject: Basic question on SharePoint usage: to guarantee access to the (most recent) published version

Hi all,



I have a basic question on SharePoint usage as a DMS for R&D documentation.



Excuse me for asking a question that has probably been asked many times before, but <excuses>.



I have been doing tech writing at my employee company for a quite a while, but always in constant crisis mode, and so have had no time to try to improve the methodology of the way we use SharePoint or the type of services that the IT dept. provides. Things have now calmed down for a bit, so I want to take the opportunity to improve the methodology.



Our SharePoint service provides the following basic user functions: Check Out, Check In, Check In Comment, Major Version, and Minor Version.



The major concern I see is as follows:



We have no way to guarantee direct access by default to the (most recent) published version, since there is no separation into (i) an easy to access âreleasesâ area and (ii) a âwork in progressâ area.



Thus, when any user accesses a document by an SP link (saved or by a search), the default retrieved document will always be the most recent update, i.e., the top of the documentâs SP stack. This could equally be a recently published version or the most recent âwork in progressâ version, where the latter includes the usual developerâs mess of inline questions, highlights, and comments, not to mention ânot yet reviewed contentâ, and more.



There are additional challenges, but the above is the main one, IMO, and the one I want to deal with first.



I suggested to the SP administrator to implement one of the following
solutions:



1. For each document access request, the SP system should display a dialog box asking the user whether: (i) Most recent published version is needed â
*or* â (ii) Most recent version is needed, and implement a filter behind the scenes.

- or â

2. Maintain two SP stacks for each document: one stack is the âPublishedâ stack and the other is the âWork in Progress stackâ.

The SP administrator refused both suggestions and said: âMy solution for you is to use the already built in functions of SP and not make things more complicatedâ.



Are there built in SP functions to guarantee that an SP link I sent out as a published version always remains pointing to a published version, and not to a âwork in progressâ version? If not, where do I go from here?



Thanks in advance.



Avraham





"Mercy on all, coz everyone's fighting some sort of battle"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Visit TechWhirl for the latest on content technology, content strategy and content development | http://techwhirl.com

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as linlaurie1 -at- hotmail -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


References:
Basic question on SharePoint usage: to guarantee access to the (most recent) published version: From: Avraham Makeler

Previous by Author: RE: getting started with Swagger / OpenAPI for REST APIs
Next by Author: Re: Adobe Worldwide Tech Comm Survey 2017â2018
Previous by Thread: Basic question on SharePoint usage: to guarantee access to the (most recent) published version
Next by Thread: More on the SharePoint thread


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads