review guidelines

Subject: review guidelines
From: Miki Magyar <MDM0857 -at- MCDATA -dot- COM>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 13:58:42 -0600

Thom posted his review guidelines, and asked for comment. Looks good, but I think it's a bit wordy. I've gone from something like that to a much briefer format, since I found that no one was actually reading the guidelines. Also, I now print them on the ugliest pink paper I can find - they don't get lost on the desk! Here's what I sent as the cover on a beta review recently. They still didn't use it, but at least I got them all back with useful redlines.

I'm presenting a paper at the Region 7 STC conference in Oct. on "How to Get the Reviews You Need - On Time." If you'd like a copy of the paper, please let me know offline and I'll send you a copy. Feedback is welcome!

mikim -at- mcdata -dot- com
Guidelines <formatting deleted for this List>

This is primarily a content review, to be sure that the content is complete and accurate, that all required topics are covered adequately, and to identify sections that need additional information or corrections.

You will see editorial comments (large italic, offset) in the text, and some TBDs. If you can answer any of the questions or fill in any of the blanks, please do so.

Please ignore any formatting issues. The Index will be added later.

Use this checklist as a guide for your review. These are the issues this review is addressing.

1. __ All required topics are included.
2. __ Content is technically accurate.
3. __ Level of detail is appropriate.
4. __ Graphics are correct.
5. __ Screen captures are correct.
6. __ Graphics and screen captures provide useful information where they are located.
7. __ All needed graphics and screen captures are included.
8. __ Procedure steps are logical, unambiguous, and complete.
9. __ If the users actually use the information in the manual for diagnosis and repair, they can do what they need to do.
10. __ It is easy to find information or answer questions.

Sections reviewed: __ all just:


From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000

Previous by Author: Re: WHAT did you say? (WAS: What is a SME?)
Next by Author: lost requests for STC paper
Previous by Thread: Re: Posting Ken Starr's report to the Internet
Next by Thread: Tech writing Folklore and Minstrelsy -- SUMMARY Available

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

Sponsored Ads