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.
Subject:Re: Version vs. Revision From:"Wittel, Teresa J." <WITTTJ -at- NCSLINK -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 13 Aug 1997 10:42:00 -0700
Suzanne Lee suggested (below) that using version could be confusing to
the users if the software didn't match the documentation. I can see her
point. Our documentation has a version number, followed by a release
number and a fix number. (Ex: 3.01.03) It always matches the code
version numbers. How can you keep track of which documentation supports
which code without matching the version numbers?
BTW, I have no aversion to using the revision system and even have used
a combination of version and revision to describe a release. (Ex:
Version 3.0, Rev. A) It all depends on what my employer has developed to
track the products.
>> what was used more: Revision or Version.
>> For Example:
>> Document A, Rev. A, B, C, etc.
>> Document A, Version 1, 1.1, 1.2, 2.0, etc.
>I have no idea which is more common, but we used to use version for our
>manuals, until we found out that it caused users got confused because it
>didn't match the software version (software version 8.0, document version