Re: Document versioning

[Shawn <shawn -at- cohodata -dot- com>]

*Thank you Margaret and Jay!Excellent suggestion.After a bit of tweaking,
consultation with an esteemed colleague, and combined with your suggestion,
this is what I have come up with:Versioning scheme: XX.xx.zz.yy.00 [draft
x] XX - Software revision (major release) xx - Software revision (minor
release) zz - Document name (99 possible documents - reuse numbers as
documents retire)        examples: 10 = user guide, 20 = setup guide,
etc. yy - Document release (incremental hex value offers 255 revisions to a
single document)00 - Document special identifier (value will indicate
localization or other special releases)         examples: NA - English
(North America), ES - Spanish (North America)  [draft âaâ] - during the
draft stage only. Increment letters for each subsequent draft
release.Example: 02.00.10.03.NA <http://02.00.10.03.NA> - A user guide, 3rd
release, associated with s/w revision 2.0 for English North America.I
dropped the date from the version scheme because the publishing date is
always automatically inserted into every document. Additionally, the
software revision is also a good indication of the document's chronological
placement.I welcome any thoughts or criticisms.Happy Friday, all!*

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Margaret Cekis <Margaret -dot- Cekis -at- comcast -dot- net>
wrote:

> Shawn Connelly described his revised document numbering system:
>  " BTW, my part number scheme is: x.x.1414.02.01.00
>
> x.x - Software revision associated with this document
>
> 1414 - Year and month of document release
>
> 02 - Major release
>
> 01 - Minor release
>
> 00 - Document type identifier (i.e. 00 - English NA version, other values
> will indicate localization or other special releases) - I haven't decided
> yet but if I use hexadecimal for this value, I can allow for 255 variations
> of a document type.
> This documentation department is new (just me now) and I want a scheme that
> won't need to be revised by allowing for all those unknown unknowns.  Love
> to hear your opinions about this document numbering scheme. "
>  ___________________________________________
>  Shawn:
> I'd go with the 2-letter alphabetical code for the document type. People
> will remember the most common ones, and I don't think you'll have 255
> document types. ( And if I remember my math for permutations and
> combinations, a 2-letter code will provide approx 26X25/2, or 325 possible
> combinations.)
> Margaret Cekis, Johns Creek GA
>
>
>
>


-- 
*Shawn Connelly*
Technical writer
<shawn -at- cohodata -dot- com>

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Read about how Georgia System Operation Corporation improved teamwork, communication, and efficiency using Doc-To-Help | http://bit.ly/1lRPd2l

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -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