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: Best places to put topics when they're needed twice
Subject:Re: Best places to put topics when they're needed twice From:Kathleen MacDowell <kathleen -dot- eamd -at- gmail -dot- com> To:Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com> Date:Tue, 5 Nov 2013 23:38:18 -0600
I'm not sure exactly which scenario the OP is documenting, but at my last
post, the customer purchased different modules. Some of the modules had
features in common with other modules, but not all.
So we had a separate manual for each module. The type of setup that would
have been best handled with a CMS, but it wasn't. I didn't mind the work,
but I did mind having to check each manual to see where new or modified
features were included. Often some of the manuals hadn't been updated for
years.
Kathleen
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:10 PM, Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com> wrote:
> I based my view on this:
>
>
> "Say that standards that a large chunk of customers must meet preclude
> those customers accessing certain of the major product features."
>
> If what you really meant was that standards that have to be met preclude
> certain USERS accessing certain of the major product features, then your
> manual as written should be ok for system admins, as long as their end
> users don't get to see it and are provided with user-level instructions
> that don't show them features they aren't supposed to access. But if
> NOBODY in your customer's organization, including the trained network
> engineers, should be accessing a certain feature, then it shouldn't be in
> the manual that customer receives with the product.
>
> Gene Kim-Eng
>
>
>
> On 11/5/2013 5:06 PM, rebecca officer wrote:
>
>> Gene, I think you're majorly underestimating the complexity of some
>> products.
>>
>
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for
> authoring.
>
> Learn more: http://bit.ly/ZeOZeQ
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as kathleen -dot- eamd -at- gmail -dot- com -dot-
>
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
>
>
> Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
>http://www.techwhirl.com/email-discussion-groups/ for more resources and
> info.
>
> Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online
> magazine at http://techwhirl.com
>
> Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public
> email archives @ http://techwr-l.com/archives
>
--
Kathleen MacDowell
kathleen -dot- eamd -at- gmail -dot- com
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for authoring.