RE: And finally, the sign-off was...

["Carnall, Jane" <Jane -dot- Carnall -at- compaq -dot- com>]

I wrote:
>I've been working on a document with an SME who has been writing a lot of
>the first-draft material, which is then edited and reformatted, etc, by me.
>She's responsible for content, I'm responsible for process, language,
>grammar, spelling, punctuation... you know, the "pretty stuff".

>When the SME doesn't like the way I edited something, she doesn't bother
>commenting: she just goes back to her original document and pastes her
>version of the section or the paragraph over my edited version. 

>(Yesterday) I sent her a final version of the
>manual. She sent me it back with a note saying that as we didn't have time
>for a final review cycle (true: this has to be signed off by end of day
>today) would I please just include her changes as is. 

I'd like to thank you all for listening so supportively to my rant, and
especially to Arlen Walker, Sandy Harris, Geoff Hart, Kim Roper, and Sanjay
Srikonda, for responding with supportive sarcasm (and helpful advice: though
it was too late at that point for this release...).

I got my SME's final changes at 2.40pm, that is, just under 3 hours before
the time I should have sent the person responsible for the kit the finished
PDF file. (Hence the bleak despair in yesterday's rant.) Three hours after
she sent it, she came past my desk to ask why I *hadn't* sent the PDF file,
and I explained, because of all her changes. 

"But why can't you just do 'accept changes'?" she inquired.

At that point, I waved under her nose her version of Chapter 3, which had
more formatting errors than I have room here to complain about. "Because
then I'd have to go through the document and check that there were no
formatting errors or inconsistencies anywhere," I said. (Some of the changes
she'd made were style changes: numbering, references, etc. I had told her
the moment her version arrived that while I was perfectly happy to discuss
style changes at a more appropriate time, I was not going to *make* style
changes to a document hours before deadline.)

Then I pointed out one place where she had simply pasted her old version
over mine, and asked her to please explain where the technical error had
crept in. "It's not exactly wrong," she said. "I just like the way I wrote
it better."

<scream suppressed> "But I'm the technical writer," I said. (She wasn't
happy.)

I finished up about 7pm. She'd gone home before 6pm, so I e-mailed her my
final queries, created a draft PDF file, printed it out, went home, and
crashed (I'd been at work for over 11 hours by that time). The sticky point
is: I missed some of her changes. (She inserted comments three times in the
whole document: none of her other changes were commented or highlighted in
any way except by the Track Changes function.) So, my bad. 

OTOH: *Most* of her changes were (I am trying not to exaggerate)
unbelievably petty for this late stage. I wanted her to make her *necessary*
changes: and I feel that I missed some of them *because* the document was
fogged with all her unnecessary fiddles. I had inserted 10 queries into the
document that I'd specifically asked her to answer, at a meeting that
morning: she didn't answer any of them directly. Plus there were a handful
of technical changes that she missed completely (I found out about them
because the test manager was also reviewing the document, and caught them.)

I spent a very stressful morning with the build waiting on the documentation
trying to finish up and clarify the final changes and reviews. I really
don't like it when that happens, because apart from anything else, it makes
*me* look bad and incompetant. 

I've asked the project manager to include a discussion on reviewing protocol
in a meeting on further documentation scheduled for tomorrow.
(Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, the SME is not invited to the
meeting.) 

So - apologies for this long introduction - I'd love to hear anyone's ideas
about what is, and isn't, an unreasonable request. (It's true that sometimes
you feel grateful when SMEs manage to do *any* reviewing, but in this
specific project (see >note at start) reviewing time is built in to the
timescale, because of the nature of the material. If they've got to do it,
they might as well do it right.)

This is what I want to say tomorrow:

My preference for reviewers is for them to make an online copy of the latest
draft (we use Word), renamed with their initials attached to the name, and
add comments to the document, explaining any changes they feel are required.
I accept that some changes (the name of an argument, a code change) are more
appropriately made directly into the document, but I want a comment noting
that this change has been made and asking me to make it a global change.  If
sections have been deleted, I want the deletion marked with a comment
explaining why it has to go. And don't ignore *my* comments in the hope
they'll go away: answer!

If it's simply a fiddle "I think it looks better that way", then fine, they
can put it in with Track Changes, I'll note it, and if *I* think it looks
better that way, I'll use it. (And I'm more likely to use it if the person
making the change can *explain* why they thought it looked better.)

When it comes to a final draft, I don't want to see any changes except error
corrections. No rewrites at the last minute!

Small spur-of-the-moment corrections, additions, etc, etc, can be sent to me
by e-mail.

Not happy (and still at work at 7pm, again...)

TIA,

Jane Carnall
Das of brillig there Of tshas of und to diye of slityuytoves of machyuten to
gyre of und to gimble ine to shabe. Zhedes of mimsy is fumbled to diye of
borogroves of und to  outgrabe there of ratyus there mho. 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Learn how to develop HTML-based Help with Macromedia Dreamweaver!
Dec. 7-8, 2000, Orlando, FL -- $100 discount for STC members.
http://www.weisner.com/training/dreamweaver_help.htm or 800-646-9989.

Your web site localized into 32 languages? Maybe not now, but sooner than 
you think. Download ForeignExchange's FREE paper, "3 steps to successful 
translation management" at http://www.fxtrans.com/3steps.html?tw.

---
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.