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 online help From:David Slonosky <David -dot- Slonosky -at- ITLS -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 9 Dec 1997 08:49:34 -0500
On December 9, 1997 4:39 AM, Richard Pineger.
[SMTP:Richard_Pineger -at- PAC -dot- CO -dot- UK] wrote:
> next to them doing the same while they do it. The links and context IDs
> will be tested separately. Indeed, the context IDs have already been
> tested.
Just as a question, how did you structure the review of your field-level
help, if you had any? I've been assigned this as a project for our product
and I'm wondering the best way to get meaningful technical review for my
field help.
Right now I'm creating a data base in Access that takes each dialog box
and briefly describes it and its contents. Once that's done, I plan to
make links to the help text contained in each dialog box and use that
along with screen clips of each box for potential reviewers.
However, this approach will take some time to do, especially as I'm
working from scratch. I was just wondering if anyone has had a quicker
system. There will probably be many potential reviewers rather than a few,
so suggestions that recommend installing ZipReview 3.0201209 on all
reveiwers' machines aren't going to work around here.
David Slonosky
Documentation Specialist
InterTrans Logistics
David -dot- Slonosky -at- itls -dot- com
Phone: (905) 944-8088 x8299 Fax: (905) 944-0547
