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: reviewing: the saga continues From:KMcLauchlan -at- chrysalis-its -dot- com To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Mon, 19 Feb 2001 13:24:12 -0500
Maybe now would be a good time to cobble up a bit
of boilerplate that you could insert in front of
documents that DO pass through your clutches, on
the way out the door.
"This document written or edited by XYZ Corporation
Technical Publications Department, May 2001"
or similar...
Docs that haven't got your blessing aren't allowed
to carry it.
The first time somebody tries to slip one through,
and you storm down to the production warehouse
and black out a few hundred bogus claims with a
big felt-tip marker... or do the same with the
films just before the run goes to press... will be
the last time they try to pull a fast one.
Never mind. Just dreeeeamin' out loud. :-)
/kevin
> -----Original Message-----
> --- "Carnall, Jane" <Jane -dot- Carnall -at- compaq -dot- com> wrote:
[snip]
> >
> > I feel this document ought to be revised/reviewed, but I
> feel proposing this
> > is certain to get flack - from the developer, who thinks he's done a
> > satisfactory job, from the project manager, who will point
> out that time is
> > pressing, from my departmental manager, who will just say
> "draw a line under
> > it". (And from my non-work self, who has a lot to do this
> week and doesn't
> > especially want to stay here till 9pm fixing this
> document.) I'm just tired
> > of the whole thing, yet this document makes my teeth itch.
> >
> > The problem is that the document is very technical. If I
> could get the
> > developer's time for an hour to go through it and check
> exactly what he
> > meant to write, then revise it, then have him review the
> changed sections,
> > it would be greatly improved. (Even, I add with clenched
> teeth, if he
> > *didn't* review the changed sections.)
> >
> > Hand it over with the errors corrected.
> > Hand it over with sections flagged for revision.
> > Third option...?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Develop HTML-Based Help with Macromedia Dreamweaver 4 ($100 STC Discount)
**WEST COAST LOCATIONS** San Jose (Mar 1-2), San Francisco (Apr 16-17) http://www.weisner.com/training/dreamweaver_help.htm or 800-646-9989.
Sponsored by ForeFront, Inc., maker of ForeHelp Help authoring tools
for print, WinHelp, HTML Help, JavaHelp, and cross-platform InterHelp
See www.forehelp.com for more information and free evaluation downloads
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
