TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Here's one for the collective wisdom of the Techwirlers.
How do you handle the situation in which one reviewer (out
of a total of six) who insists that his/her changes/edits
_must_ be incorporated in to the current revision?
I have one review team member who is adamant that
his/her edits absolutely must be incorporated into the
current revision, regardless of the opinions of the other
team members and myself. He/She is the "software
quality assurance" engineer and as such insists that the
quality of the manual is within his/her purview.
My position is (and has been for the last twelve years of
being a tech writer) that I will accommodate a reviewer's
edits "within reason" and that as the writer _I_ have the
final say in what goes in the manuals.
Your opinions are solicited. Please reply to the list so we
can all benefit from your opinion.
Thanks
Charlie Webster
cwebster -at- ix -dot- netcom -dot- com
"Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a
dog it's too dark to read." -- Groucho Marx
--
"Outside of a dog, a book is a mans best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read" -- Groucho Marx
