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.
It depends how good the beta software and/or documentation is,
IMHO, as well as how much damage the software/incorrect damage
could do. If you have good, benign software and docs, then "beta" on the
cover and maybe the headers or footers is sufficient. If you're
concerned that
problems with the software or docs could cause customers some
damage (for example, lost data in the case of a backup application),
then I would put a "beta" or "draft" watermark on every page.
A.
>----------
>From: Michal Berman (telaviv)[SMTP:Michal -at- TELAVIV -dot- NDSOFT -dot- COM]
>Sent: Thursday, July 03, 1997 12:50 AM
>To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
>Subject: Footers for Beta documentation
>
>Are there (legal or other) standards to consider when producing
>documentation for beta versions of a software product? More
>specifically, is it essential to put the word "beta" next to the version
>number in the footer of the beta documentation on every page? Or is
>simply putting the word "beta" on the cover enough?
>
TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot- Send commands
to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/ or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html
