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.
Re: if you had 60 seconds to evaluate a support web page, what would you look for
Subject:Re: if you had 60 seconds to evaluate a support web page, what would you look for From:'Technical Writing Plus' <doc-x -at- earthlink -dot- net> To:John Posada <jposada99 -at- gmail -dot- com>, Tekwrl <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com> Date:Tue, 21 Dec 2010 11:44:16 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
John, Very interesting. Before reading any of the stuff that you have written, let me say this.
People who develop this kind of thing ought to stick to the basic and stupid things first and get them out of the way.
What is the name of the department or company? What do they do? Who is the person the is responsible for addressing the issue or fixing the problem and how exactly - exactly - do you get in touch with the person (just naming the department here is not good enough). ..
OK now I have scanned over your overview of the content. And, I do not feel qualified or experienced enough with QA to address any of it. But I do think that the basic/'stupid' stuff that I have described above really applies.
And I apologize to anyone who feels that he or she is stupid -- I do not mean to slight you. It is just that, well, people ought to make sure that they get the basic things done first and done well.
Jim Jones
Sr Member STC
communication.openhill.com
chineseadjuster.webs.com
-----Original Message-----
>From: John Posada <jposada99 -at- gmail -dot- com>
>Sent: Dec 21, 2010 11:53 AM
>To: List,Ã Techwriter <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
>Subject: if you had 60 seconds to evaluate a support web page, what would you look for
>
>OK...odd question.
>
>I have about 1100+ public support web pages where I need to do an
>objective evaluation of subjective criteria. This evaluation will be
>done by a few "volunteers" over the next few days.
>
>I need some ideas on what you might look for. BTW...I'm submitting my
>recommendations at 5pm today, but no rush :-)
>As a start, to give the question perspective, here's what I'm thinking so far:
>
>
>Content
>Using the Concept/Task/Reference set of categories, does the article
>contain mixed or is it clearly in a category
>2 â Fits category
>1 â Mixed Categories
>0 â Doesnât match category
>
>Does the content match the title
>Coming to an article because of the title, is the content what you expected
>3 â Close Match
>2 â Vague Match
>1 â No Match...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help.
Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need. Try
Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days. http://www.doctohelp.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-
