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: Avraham Makeler <amakeler -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: Lin Laurie <linlaurie1 -at- hotmail -dot- com>, techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 15:01:51 +0200

Hi all,

Lin wrote to me again and added as follows:

An approach is to set up the WIP site with several folders depending on the
number of writers on the team:



- Each writerâs working folder
- Ready for Review
- Review Complete
- Final Review
- Ready for Publication

Anything ready for publication is what is moved over to the published
folder for users to access. On starting on the next version of something, a
recommendation is to get it from the ready for publication folder.



If there are different products, each product would have its own WIP folder
structure.



The work in progress area should be made available to myself and my team so
no one else can access it even if it appeared on search. The company SP
admin would be able to take care of that piece. As writers, we should just
be responsible for moving your published material over to the site that was
designated as public or âpublishedâ and the Admin would have that site made
accessible via their search tool."


Blessings
Avraham



On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Avraham Makeler <amakeler -at- gmail -dot- com> wrote:

> Hi Lin,
>
> Thank you very much for your quick and very useful response.
>
> >> 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.
>
> Similar to my solution (ii) that I suggested, I think.
>
> May I ask you to tell me your position, so I can provide "testimonials" to
> my SP admin. that have more impact than they would if I just provide them
> as names on a TW list?
>
> Blessings,
>
> Avraham
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 2:18 AM, Lin Laurie <linlaurie1 -at- hotmail -dot- com>
> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> avraham
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Avraham Makeler
> Tel: +972 (0)54-3084-886
> Fax: +972 (0)8-945-1624 <+972%208-945-1624>
> amakeler -at- gmail -dot- com
>
>
> "Mercy on all, coz everyone's fighting some sort of battle"
>
>
>


--
Regards,
avraham

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Avraham Makeler
Tel: +972 (0)54-3084-886
Fax: +972 (0)8-945-1624 <+972%208-945-1624>
amakeler -at- gmail -dot- com


"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 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


Previous by Author: More on the SharePoint thread
Next by Author: RE: Greenhouse Gas icon
Previous by Thread: Re: TECHWR-L Digest, Vol 146, Issue 16


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads