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: Need input From:Tom Brophy <tom -at- TCRAFT -dot- COM> Date:Sun, 9 May 1999 21:57:25 +0100
I run into this kind of scenario all the time in localization :-(
> My questions are the following:
> 1. They are very unhappy with the cost of the docs at this
> point and simply don't want to see that redesigning multiple
> times and no specs have caused this. Any input into helping
> them get this? I have explained and explained but to no avail.
I've found Steve McConnell's book - Rapid Development (ISBN 1-55615-900-5) - very useful when dealing with this type of client. It will give you several possible approaches you can try out ...
> 2. They want the Framemaker chapters, as they are finished,
> checked into Source Safe with the ability to print and send
> out a manual at any time.
> Both writers work off site and may not be included in the
> loop on this release pattern. The client wants to have the
> manual ready to PDF at any moment. I don't seem to be getting
> across that releasing is going to take a day to generate/update,
> etc., before it is in shape for a customer to see - page
> numbering, toc, index, chapter numbers all that. Their point of
> view is that code can be built at any moment and sent out, if
> needed. Docs should be as well.
They're not quite comparing like with like! A chapter of a book is not a standalone deliverable in the same way that a single exe/dll might be. The correct analogy is book to exe/dll. To put their requirement in software terms, they're asking you to check in individual c/cpp files for an exe/dll, expecting to be able to build an exe/dll, and (?) expecting it to do something useful. It's unlikely to happen.
> With 2 writer working on separate parts of the same manual, how
> has anyone else managed this? Is what they want possible? How
> do you manage things like xrefs to other chapters? As far as I
> can see, even if I get a copy of the chapters when they are
> checked in and use those to make my xrefs, I can't make sure
> that it is all going to work when I check my parts in...
Agreed. The problem is the granularity of the required deliverable.
> Am I not seeing something? I keep telling them that one person
> has to own the book and we are simply not at the point where
> this can happen... But I want them to have what they want...
Sometimes, you've got to disappoint/re-educate a client. It seems self-evident that your client doesn't have a very sophisticated development methodology - if any. Even at this late stage, they seemingly still believe that they don't have the time to do the job properly, but do have the time to make a balls of it, and then presumably fix it, several times over!
Throw the book (see above) at them!
// Tom Brophy, Email: tom -at- tcraft -dot- com
// Translation Craft, 19A Main Street, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland
// Phone:+353 1 2836336; Mobile:+353 86 8295856; Fax:+353 1 2783572