Survey on skin editor for help authoring tool

HI . I am student at National Institute of Design , And I am doing some Research Regarding Skin editors in Help authoring tools(specific to Robohelp) For my project.Kindly, fill in the survey Asap.Here is the link...

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=K6ce79LFlwbZuRFVDZxXJA_3d_3d

Thanks ,

Managing Writers: A Real World Guide to Managing Technical Documentation
Richard L. Hamilton,
XML Press, Ft. Collins, CO 2009

Review by Jeannine M. E. Klein, Ph.D.
Aside from the 1996 classic Managing Your Documentation Projects by JoAnn Hackos and its 2006 update, Information Development: Managing Your Documentation Projects, Portfolio, and People, few books exist in the specialized niche where management meets technical writing. General technical management books abound; there is even a relatively significant library on technical writing per se. But when it comes to herding that particular species of cats known as technical writers, few guideposts exist. Richard L. Hamilton addresses this void with Managing Writers: A Real World Guide to Managing Technical Documentation. Technical writers new to management should find the book helpful when navigating the unfamiliar waters of HR, project coordination, and technology acquisition; experienced managers new to the technical writing team will appreciate the insights into this specialized branch of technology.

by Suzette Leeming

I ventured into the online help world in the mid 90’s and reviewed a few different help authoring packages at that time, such as HelpBreeze, Doc-to-Help, and RoboHelp. At that time, almost all help authoring packages used Word. I went through a similar review around 2005, although my needs had changed; I wanted a single-source solution that didn't use Word. When I was offered the opportunity to review Doc-to-Help 2009, I eagerly looked forward to seeing how much the software had evolved and to seeing whether or not it was still dependent on Word.

I finally found time to work with the Print Manual Designer in Help & Manual.

This is a feature that provides a great deal of flexibility. As with any tool, I strongly recommend that you read the online Help first, and work through Help & Manual's tutorial for this.

If you have graphics that will be part of the DTP (usually logos for company branding), do make sure they are resized appropriately, and saved as BMP, EMF, or WMF files.

I spent some time reading through the Help files, trying to find a simple way to edit the look and appearance of my help files. At first I kept missing it. Finally, I realized that the instructions meant what they said. That is, open the examples provided and follow the instructions there. I did that, and wow–I moved on to customization very quickly.

I was pleased to see that I did indeed receive a response from Help & Manual service and support within 24 hours.

Their response was excellent. They explained that I could not search and replace for links, per se, but did advise how I could do this. They explained how to do this in the XML files, and suggested a tool that would help me to do this.

I started by taking my imported project and trying to use the search and replace for different options. I really like the variable feature. I created a variable for company names which could change from project to project. Search and replace for variables worked like a dream. In addition, instructions were easy to follow. I like the interface more and more. There is a lot to take in, but whenever I click commands that have work screens associated with them, instructions are displayed as well, with links to related help.

Downloaded and installed Help & Manual today. I was stunned by how quickly it downloaded, and how painlessly it was installed. I was very impressed by the interface. I had to review a few other Help software programs back in October, for another company.

The only Help software that I looked at that came close to being as simple as this, was Flare V9… but truth be told (and I really liked Flare), I am stunned by how quickly I was able to get up and running with Help & Manual.

by Geoff Hart

Even the most skillful technical writers face the task of persuading Subject Matter Experts ("SMEs") to review our documentation for technical correctness; after all, they're the experts, not us. If pressed, even the most reluctant SMEs acknowledge the value of these reviews. For example, where the interface is in a state of flux, you may have documented something that's changed since you last saw it, or may simply have misinterpreted something that seemed perfectly clear to the person who developed it--and to nobody else. But reviews still take them away from their regular work. And when they're working overtime to meet a deadline--which is often the case in today's "hurry up" world--they find that additional work particularly intrusive and unwelcome. Being only human, rumors to the contrary notwithstanding, they'll seek ways to avoid the extra work or to focus on easier targets than technical checks--such as your writing style. Worse still, carefully reviewing the copious documentation generated by complex products requires concentration and dedication that reviewers may simply be unable to provide.

by M. Katherine Brown (Kit)

Mention team technical reviews to a group of tech writers and chances are good that you will either get a loud, collective groan, or the group will vie to tell the best review horror story. On the one hand, technical reviews are a vital part of our jobs because they help us to produce high quality product documents. On the other hand, technical reviews gone wrong are the bane of our existence. The good news is that we have the power to conduct consistently effective technical reviews.

This article summarizes why we do reviews and what often goes wrong in reviews, and then summarizes steps to take before, during, and after technical reviews that can help you conduct effective team technical reviews. Although your process and team may differ from what's described here, you can apply the information in part or in whole to improve your current review process.