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:Best Practice for reviewing documents From:"Lucero, Peggy" <plucero -at- atsva -dot- com> To:<techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com> Date:Tue, 20 Dec 2005 08:00:58 -0500
I have numerous technical documents that are mostly written by the team
member responsible for and working daily within subject area of said
document.
After the developer finishes his writing/delivering content, document
then needs to go through peer review and then be reviewed by the client.
Each of these reviews is likely to result in
changes/deletions/additions/recommendations, etc. all done in WORD with
tracking changes on.
In the highly technical documents my part is mainly as an
editor/overseer for spelling, grammar, sentence structure, punctuation,
layout, format, etc.
Question is this-
during the review process, how many times should I be reviewing the
document and making editorial changes? I have been advised that the'
subject matter expert' for these documents, the team lead for
operations, needs to make his review of documents after peer/client
reviews to accept their changes/additions/deletions/recommendations as
only he is in a position to judge the technical accuracy. Of course, I
am the only person on this team in the position to judge the spelling,
grammar, sentence structure, punctuation, layout, format, etc.
Boss says that after the client reviews document and makes their
recommendations document should not be changed. This bothers me as I
don't believe the client is in the best position to judge the spelling,
grammar, sentence structure, punctuation, layout, format, etc.
Just living and learning here, and hoping others can make suggestions on
how best to handle this. Also, I am allowing 5 days, typically, for the
peer review and 5 days for the client review. Is that appropriate?
Thanks,
Now Shipping -- WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word! Easily create online
Help. And online anything else. Redesigned interface with a new
project-based workflow. Try it today! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
Doc-To-Help 2005 now has RoboHelp Converter and HTML Source: Author
content and configure Help in MS Word or any HTML editor. No
proprietary editor! *August release. http://www.componentone.com/TECHWRL/DocToHelp2005
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- infoinfocus -dot- com -dot-