RE: document reviewers

Subject: RE: document reviewers
From: Scott Havens <SHavens -at- Elcotel -dot- com>
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1999 13:45:09 -0400

...The horse's mouth, aka the Engineering Department...

The horse's what? (Sorry, I just couldn't resist that one, cheap
shot though it was...) Seriously, sometimes the engineer is the ONLY
choice, at least for the highly technical details of a document. We also
use the Validation group--the folks who take the SW before it's released and
try to root out all of the bugs others might have missed. They have a good
eye for detail, and have often provided excellent feedback. (OTOH, they
sometimes file discrepancy notices against the documentation, too, so you
have to be ready to deal with that added bit of beaurocracy!)

> I think overall control should rest with the documentation department.
> The
> other people who as you say "have their hands in the pot," can be a useful
> resource, but the writers should control what is written...
I fully agree with this. It's nice to have other departments'
inputs, but you have to make it clear that the tech comm people make the
final decisions.

Have a great Labor Day weekend. (NOTE: This politically
insensitive closing statement is thrown in specifically to alienate and
annoy our Canadian and European list members. Please send all flames,
discrimination lawsuits, and related items to the undersigned. Views
expressed do not represent those of my employer, my government, or my wife.
Names changed to protect the innocent. No purchase necessary to enter.
Member FDIC.)


Previous by Author: RE: An encode/decode system
Next by Author: RE: OT? NT4 op sys - Any Probs
Previous by Thread: document reviewers
Next by Thread: FWD: Intermountain STC Chapter seeking newsletter contributions

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

Sponsored Ads