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: Documentation Estimates From:"Linda H. Schoenhoff" <lhs -at- UNIFY -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 28 Nov 1994 09:28:12 PST
Rick Lippincott writes:
>I'm curious, though, about the rate for "indexing." Using an indexing function
>on FrameMaker, I can apparently work much faster than that. On the othe hand,
>certain parts of the task are "invisible", setting up the properly coded info
>in the text ahead of time. Has the estimated time for indexing gone down? Or
>is it just moved to a different location? What's the opinion on this?
With regard to indexing, I'd also include time to print it out and proof it,
looking for punctuation errors, formatting lapses, improper subordination,
first level entries with only one second level entry, and the kind of unintended
duplication that produces things that look like this:
Files, opening
File, opening
File, open
Consolidating and correcting an index can be quite time-consuming and may
take several iterations if the index is large and complex. Finally, you
may spend some time tweaking your two-column index to break attractively
across pages, which also takes a little time. So I don't think the time
estimate is unreasonable.
